Star.
London, England, 1825-08-02 00:00:00

BRUNSWICK, JULY 21.

The extreme heat of the weather has been accom-
panied with numerous fires in our vicinity, and other
pans of the Country, which the great drought has ren.
deredsparticulatly destructive.
GLASGOW, JULY 23. •

Since Tuesday the heat has been excessive. Not a
breath of air has stirred, and scarcely a cloud has
been seen in the Heavens.- We have had completely
the climate of the .torrid zone. The thermometer on
Tbeiday evening stood at 87 degrees in the neighbour-
hood of this city, and in a northern exposure. Yester-
da'y, at 4 13.241: it stood at 85 degrees, in a cool northern
exposure in the town. In some places it was still higher.
In tilt! country, and in elevated situations, it rose to
ISO degrees in the sun. The thermometer, this fore-
noon, at ten o'clock, stood at 75 degrees. The pastures
ale buirit vp. The fruit is falling from the trees for
• want of nourishment. The potatue fields are in many
places beginning to get shrivelled, and their growth is
at a stand for want of moisture. The wheat and barley
crops are secure and ripening rapidly, but the oats on
dry soils are whitening faster than they are filling.

LAW REPURJ.

COURT OF CHANCERY, AUGUST i.
ELEPHANT AND CASTLE CHARITY.
The 'AHD CHANCELLOR re-sated all the circum-
stances of. this case, and observed, that he had a few
points to consider ; first, whether, under Sir S. R.omilly's
Ant, the Court could do that which would amount to
a declaration that the Overseers were not contemplated
"bythe Founder of the Chat ity ? If the Court had not
jurisdiction to do that, the question would be, whether
the Turst did not fail, as the.. Churchwardens had to
act independent of the Overseers% lf, on the other hand,
the Court had jurisdiction, then it might be proper to
consider how far the plans cf the Master ought to be
adopted ? This wat, an important question, and the
Court was desirous of terminating the dispute about
the distribution of the funds of the Charity. It was
open, unfoituna.ely, to enquiry, whether it would
be wise to carry the matter to the House of Lords?—
On all the be rings of the case the Court would give
,I.ltlgntent on Wednesday.
Mr. HART expressed some regret to hear his Lord-
ship raggest the removal of the cause to the highest
Tribunal, as it might be the means of wasting the
enflvey of the Charity in litigation.
The Lour Crsticst.t.on did not mean to suffer any unnecessary
expenditure of the fund. and certainly should take 'Me the Cbe.rity
is not liable to further tosses.
JONES V. LEW 33.
Mr. Honns moved to discharge the order of the
':ice-Chancellor, which called upon the plaintiff to
produce an agreement for the inspection of the defend-
ant. The bill was filed for the specific performance
ot. an agreement, by which it was alleged the defend-
ant agreed, on the marriage of Jones and his wife,'
to supply them with chamber furniture.
The defendant stated in an affidavit, that she could
not answer the bill until she saw the agreement; she
knew of no such agreement; and if any such was in
existence, she believed it to be a forgery.
Mr. Howse said, theie was nothing in the defend-
ant's affidavit to prevent the plaintiff from going on
with his bill, and contended, that the plaintiff could
not be compelled to deliver the agreement.
..Mr. imam was beard in support of the Vice-Chancellor's order.
The LORD CHANCELLOR held, that the affidavit was
an answer to the plaintiff's bill, and that after the 461e-
iendaut had said the agreement was a forgery, he
could not order it to be produced.
The motion was.granted.-.—His Lordship rose between two and
tbtee o'clock.