Star.
London, England, 1825-02-18 00:00:00

LAW REPORT.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FEBRUARY 17.
The LORD CHIEF Jorrice tried several causes, which
were entirely destitute of interest.
ARCHES' COURT, FEBRUARY 17.
REV. R. FITZHERBERT FULLER AND OTHERS V. LANE.
The facts of this case, which we before have had
occasion to state, were not possessed of any peculiar
interest.. They regarded the right to a pew attached
formerly to the estate of Battlers, which estate having
passed, by the marriage of the last representative of its
owners, to Mr. Line (a Gentleman of large landed pro-
perty in the parish where Battlers is situated), he con-
ceived that he had a possessory right to the ancient pew
of the family. The Minister and Churchwardens hav-
ing
opposed Mr. Lane's claim, the cause was tried in
the Consistory Court, of London, and appealed from
thence by the other parties. On the appeal, he applied
to this Court for the grant of a 'faculty to seat his fin
mill in the contested pew.. •
The Court has been occupied during a day or two
with a very elaborvte argument on this question, and
to-day Sir J. norm +, to a very full judgment, se-
tned to grant the faculty.
THE! OFFICE or THE JODGR.PROMOTED IT MONTAGUE
RURUOYNE, ESQ. O. THE REV. B. D. FREE, LLD.
. These articles were exhibited against the reverend de-
fendant, by reason of *alleged immorality of conduct of
a very gill! natrae;
.but as some of these articles have
not been stiffeied by the. Court to go to proof, we are,
uncertain of the extent of the facts, and shall reserve
any statement of them, therefore, till they come on for
argument and sentence; observing, for the present, that
they impute to Dr. Free the commission of various actsl
of fornication, profane sweating, &c. The case comes
up by letters of request from the Master of the Facul-
ties and Commissary of the Diccesan. for the Archdea-
conry of 11...dt..rJ, and throughout the whole diocese cf
Lincoln. In the recital, at the head of the articles, they
are stated to have been exhibited against the Reverend
lt. Dix Free, Doctor in Divinity, (or his soul's health,
and the lawful reformation of his manners And excesses,
Ste. and especially for swearing, fornication, and
indecent conveisation; for drunkenness and immorality,
and a lew d and profligate life and behaviour; for neglect
of Divine Service on Sundays ; for using the porch of
the Church, as a stable, and turning out swine therein;
for converting into his own property land vested in the
Churchwardens of the. parish of Which he is the Rector;
for refusing, .to bury sundry bodies when brought to
him for interment, and for his tensing (as iustalficaent)
the customary legal fees.
On a former Court -day, Dr. Jesse Armaras stated that
he was for the party cited, who had appeared under
protest to this Court's jurisdiction, contending that let-
ters of fewest !root the Court of the Archdeaconry dr
Bedford, orperly lay: tii the Consistinial CoUrt of the
Diocesan, jelie Br'shop.of Larcoln), • and not the Arches'
eourt.- How ever that triiihtlie, the Leirbed COunsel
contendedthat 'these 'letter; of request' ought to have
been signed by the CLancellor of the diocese out of
which they
,were issued:lot-these were not signed by
. chiincellor Battle, LL.D.) They were signed
•bp.Riahatcf Smith,.M.A. the Master and Commissary
'aforesaid. Now it was. the general opinion and p ac-
'refs of request came up to the same Count
Id had" thii. ease • been one of appeal, it'
lave anni up in the first instance to the
tit of the Bishop of Lincoln. He ad-.
itt the well-fainters case of ‘• Sullivan
letters. 61 request aright be good trout
.dictioh to.the highest, with, ut going up
iirappir tely above the jurisdiction remoted
tethhat."Ole ippellate jurisdiction 'aunt

aroresam. 5.. u..
i ." - 'lice., that letters
lir
as appeals; ant
a,
I . would Clearly 'll
i ' doirsistori Cniir
Ai
titled th •
ii and Sullivan,"
art inferior jaris,
1 - tti-that ilex. inn
from. But- the