Star.
London, England, 1824-12-15 00:00:00

0 REPUBLIC OF HAYTI.

" Port-au-Prince, July 31, 1824.
am desired by his Excellency the Pi esident
of Hayti, to acknowledge the receipt of your letter
dated the 3d of April, as well as of the case of military
books which your friend has been kind enough to send.
The taste which is evinced in this small collection, and
the feeling which directed its emission, have given sin-
cere pleasure to his Excellency. The President of Hayti
is equally sensible of the warm interest which this Gen-
tleman takes in the prosperity of the Republic, mani-
fested in the letter written by him to you, and which
you have forwarded with your own: his Excellency has
expressed his acknowledgment in the enclosed letter.
With relation to the grievances of the Methodists, they
are of so delicate a nature, that you will permit me to
reply to them.
" The first Christians, and at a later period, the first
Protestants, were said to be persecuted, were called the
martyrs of their faith, when they were robbed of their
property—when they were banished their native land—
Jar when they were made to undergo punishments the
most cruel, or to suffer death. Assuredly the Metho-
dists have endured nothing like this in Hayti. But
tumults have been excited against them! their lives
have been menaced ! an armed force has seized thirty
of them I The Magistrate caused them to be conducted
to prison ; and in order to procure a release, they were
compelled to pay one dollar per head ! Whenever one
sect endeavours to make proselytes in a country where
there exists another sect which is more numerous and
more powerful, it is unhappily in the nature of human
passions, that the one should consider the other as an
enemy, whose exertions tend to nothing less than taking
away a portion of that which it regards as its inherit.
ance. Thus the zeal of the Methodists aroused the
zeal of the Catholics. Evil was the inevitable conse-
quence. To prevent this, the Government, with whom
the well-being of the people is the supreme law, was
compelled to invite the Missionaries to retire. Hence
arose the complaints of the Methodists. Now let us
suppose that the Government had pursued a contrary
course, and what would have been the result ?
There were not more than thirty Methodists—there
would be a hundred Catholics, who must be thrown into
prison, and who could not depart thence until they had
paid the gaoler the customary fee. Would the Mis-
sionaries and their converts remain unmolested? The
hundred Catholics released, and their relatives—would
they rest quietly on the first going forth or assembling
of their antagonists? I imagine not. There would be
at once a thousand Catholics whom it would be neces-
sary to imprison. And even then would the Methodists
be more undisturbed ? No. The zeal of the persecuted
Catholics would be inflamed more and more, and Hayti
would become the prey of religious wars. The thought
alone makes me tremble.
" We do not fear that we shall be accused of violating
our Constitation,which has proclaimed toleration. With-
out doubt, every man, of whatever colour, of whatever

nation, of whatever religion he is. may be a%stited of the
protection of the law, as long as he does riot seek to make
converts, and is content to worship G in his own way.
But from the moment that his zeal addresses itselfto
others, he incurs a hazard. If no yoke is raised against
him, the Government, which given to all the liberty of
conscience, is silent and tolerates; but if the people are
enraged against the nesvlklissioAries, and consequences-
the moat evil are likely to result, it becomes obligatory
upon the Government to invite them to retire, for their
own intere-t. Is it not thus that all wise Governments
ac; ? Toleration in Hayti has fewer restrictions than in
any other place. Every citizen, whatever be his belief
or hi. worship, is free to enjoy ail civil and political
rights,
and to fill all public situations. Do the Catholics,
I would ask of you, experience this equality of rights in
Great Britain ?
4. The principles of our Government are not altered.
If, under the late President, and for some time after the
accession of the present President, the Methodists to-
joyed some degree of favour, it was because their body
had not at that time given occasion to any tumults.—
A time may come which shall be equally favourable to
them ; but at the present moment, when the presence of
their Missionaries will cast the torch of discord amidst
our families, the Government cannot tolerate their pro-
selytism. The conduct of the Government with regard to
Catholic Bishop Glory, whose presence was the cause of
disturbances in Hayti, must prove to the Methodists its
impartiality towards all worships; and the pecuniary
donation which the present President sent to their so-
ciety, in recompense for their past sufferings, and in
consideration of their charitable intentions, must give
assurance to them of his personal sentiments in their
favour. I beg. Sir, to offer to you the expression of my
high consideration, &c.
(Signed)

• " B. INGINAC,
" General of Brigade and Secretary-General
to his Excellency the President of Hayti.
" To John Bewring, Esq., &e. London."

LAW REPORT.

COURT OF CHANCERY, DECEMBER 14.

WAITER 8. EARLE&
The LORD CHANCELLOR directed that the wife of the
defendant should be detained in town, under cautious
and kind treatment, so as not to irritateher mind, until
the further direction of the Court.

It will be remembered that this is the Lady whose
confinement and sufferings in a country gaol were
brought before the Court by Mr. Murray, the Solicitor,
in the course of a cause wherein attachment had gone
out against her husband, and reflectively against her-
self, for want of answer to a bill in equity.

JOHNSON V. THE EARL OF MANSFIELD.
Mr. HORNE applied to his Lordship to allow this mo-
tion to be made before the Vice• Chancellor.
The short facts of the case were these : Mr. Johnson
took a lease of some property of the Earl of Mansfield,
situated at Hornsey, at an annual rental of £7OO. It
was agreed by the Earl to allow a sum of £5OO on
taking possession. Notice of motion was given by the
Earl to compel the defendant to pay into Court 050,
being half a year's rent. The answer to that motion
ould have been, that £5OO was due by the Earl, and
that that debt covered the sum claimed. The parties
then waited until another half-year's rent was due,
making a total sum of L'7oo; and novice of this motion
had been given before the Vice-Chancellor. It was
hoped, therefore, under these circumstances, costs would
be allowed upon the first motion.
The LORD CHANCELLOR directed that both motions
should be heard before the Vice-Chancellor, and sug-
gested that his Honour should consider what, under the
circumstances, ought to be the costs allowed.

MARQUIS OF HERTFORD V. THE EARL OF DARLINGTON.

This was a motion submitted by the Solicitor-General
to confirm the order of Commissioners appointed to
make partition of certain estates belonging to the parties.
The bill of partition was originally filed by the Marquis
of Hertford, and the Vice-Chancellor had fully heard
and decided the case, by quashing the order. The pro-
perty in question consisted of a number of valuable
houses, and it appeared that the Noble Marquii pos-
sessed two fourth shares, the Earl of Darlington one
fourth, and Chapman, an infant, the remaining share. "
After hearing Mr. Coa and Mr. KNIGHT (as juniors
to the Solicitor-General) on one side, and Mr. Holum
and Mr. LOVAT on the other, the LORD CHANCELLOR,
refused the motion, and confirmed the decision of the
Vice-Chancellor.
COURT OF KING'S BENCH, DECEMBER 14.
BEAVAN V. JONES.
This was an action brought against the defendant,
the Marshal of the King's Bench Prison, to recover
El 19 18s. 4d. the amount of a prisoner's debt, who had
escaped from custody. It appeared in evidence, that
the plaintiff, a livery-stable-keeper, had arrested a debtor
of the name of Sarah Saunders, who had surrendered

into the custody of the Marshal, in discharge of her bail.
The prisoner had been allowed the benefit of the Rules,
but in June last she broke the bounds, and regardless of
her confinement, she had gone to reside at Bayswater,
taking a ready-furnished house, living in a respectable
style, and incurring every species of expenses, as long as
she could obtain credit from the tradesmen in the neigh-
bour hood. When she became well known at Bayswater,
she repaired to No. 9, Beaamont-street, Mary-la-bonne,
where she resided as a Lady of fashion, living at corhi-
derable expense, and frequently pring a cabriolet and
horses for her amusement. In this new residence sic
neither paid rent, nor any tradesmen's bills. But in
September last, the attorney of the plaintiff being in-
formed of the prisoner's proceedings, gave information
to the Marshal that she was out of gaol, and on the 11th
of October, she was again apprehended, and lodged
within the walls of the prison, where she had been kept
in close confinement ever since. These facts were proved
by several witnesses.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE informed the Jury, that the
plaintiff was entitled to recover only in, proportion to
the injury he had sustained by the escape of the prisoner.
This woman, it had been proved, had made no payments
whatever, but had defrauded every tradesman or other
person of whom she could obtain credit in every place
-where she had resided. The only question for the Jury
to determine was, whether the strict confinement of the