Star.
London, England, 1813-08-05 00:00:00

Ptt PAitticdLititt OF tHE Litti
MURDER:

Coblli' OF CHANCEItY, AUGUST 4.
BANKRUPT PETITION.
EXPARTE HARDY 11.1 THIr MATTER OP FLINDERS%
This was a petition of one of the Assignees of thel
Bankrupt, for an order to compel the Solicitor, who
had acted in the Commission till the choice of As-
signees, to deliver up the proceedings; and the books
of the bankrupt, to the Assignees, they having chosen
another solicitor.
It appeared from the affidayite elf tae Assignee,
Hardy, and others, that the Solicitor had refused to
deliver up the proceedings and books, though re-
quested to do so by the Assignees, until his bill and
,costs should be paid, amounting to £10), for pro-
ceedings previous to the choice of assignees, and £63
afterwards. The petitioner took the opinion of Coun-
sel (Mr. Montagne), and sent it to the solicitor; in
which opinion it was stated, that the Solicitor was
bound to deliver up the proceedings. The Solicitor
enquired whether this was the opinion of Mr. Bazil
Montague ?—and stated, that if it was, he had the
greatest respect for it ; but that long habits of busi-
ness had given him some right to rely upon his own
opinion, and he refused to comply till the bill was paid.
Sir S. ROMILLY and Mr. MONTAGUE, for the Peti-
tioner; Mr. HART and Mr. CULLES, for the Solidi-
tor.—lt was admitted on all hands (and could not
be denied), that the Solicitor, who had acted up to
the time of the choice of Assignees, was bound to
deliver the proceedings to the Assignees, provided
they chose another Solicitor. It was argued for the
Solicitor, that he had, in fact, acted as Solicitor sub-
sequent to the choice of Assignees ; that he had sat.
tended the last examination of the Bankrupt, and had
been recognised by the Assignees as Solicitor.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said, there could be no
doubt but the Solicitor was bound to deliver up the
proceedings ; but it might be a different question in
regard to the books, unless they were referred to in
the proceedings, so as to constitute part of these
proceedings. He understood it to be stated, that
they had been referred to, and that they therefore
constituted part of the proceedings. But then it was
a question whether he had not a lien upon these pa.
pers, as far as respected the proceedings after the
choice of Assignees.
His Lordship did not clearly see from these affida-
vits that he had been employed by the Assignees,
but merely that he had attended and answered ques-
tions.—Ordered, that the proceedings and books beg
delivered up to the Assignees:
BANKRUPT PETITION.—EXPARTE MEACHER IN THE
MATTER OF MEACHER.
The Meachers, father and eldest son, had become
bankrupts. Previous to the bankruptcy, the family,
it appeared, had been possessed of considerable pro-
perty. The eldest son was to have about £30,000
on his coming of age. The Earl of Bridgewater had
purchased part of the family property, and the father,
it appeared, had, in respect of this, or some other
Saturday se'nnight, Daniel Kiri, a prisoner con- transaction, £5910 in his hands, which property be-
fined in the gaol of Armagh, attempted to murder longed to the son. 'When the son came of age, the
the deputy gaoler, by stabbing him with a knife.— father urged him to make some provision for his
b
This wretch seems to be equal to the most atroccousrother and sisters, and to allow him (the father) to
retain the sum of 5e5910, as trustee for the younger
crimes: he several times invited his intended victim
into the yard, under pretence of communicating some-
children. The sum, however, which the father wished
to have for this purpose, was £6OOO, being se`2ooo
thing serious to him, with the intention (as is sup-
posed), of putting his scheme in practice, when the for each of the younger children. It was alledged on
the part of the Lacher, that the son had agreed to
door would be opened, by which means he hoped to
escape, by getting into his possession the key of the allow this sum :the father, as the Chancellor observ.
outward-door. From his suspicious conduct, and a ed, probably using an argument very common on
madness he feigned fbr the purpose of eluding im-
these occasions, viz. that if the brother and sisters
pending justice, it was thought necessary to handcuff
had been in his situation, they would do as much for
him ; when doing so, he suddenly snatched the him. The father, having become bankrupt, proved
tinder his own commission for the sum of £6OOO in
weapon from his breast and stabbed him twice, aim-
his character of trustee for the younger children.—
ing for the throat, but it happily struck the jawbone.
The son having become bankrupt, his assignees very
Fortunately the weapon had been broke in the point,
else it would inevitably have glided off the bone, and properly, as the Chancellor stated, in a transaction
of this unusual nature, chose to have the matter in-
probably killed him. Of ten who were present, all
v
fled but one, who, possessing more courage than the vestigated as a claim of the estate of the son upon
rest, knocked the miscreant down with a blow of his that of the father for the amount of the debt alledged
t
fist, but ere he could wrest the weapon from him,o be due from the father to the son. A Petition
was presented to the Chancellor two years ago upon
he also received two wounds in his left arm ; how-
ever, there is no danger apprehended f r their lives. this ground, and the question was, whether the son
.had or had not really agreed to make this allowance
VAUXHALL REGATTA—Yesterday tfe annual whet:-
to the younger children before any contemplation of
ry given by the Proprietors of Vauxhall Gardens was
contested for by seven watermen, who had never won
',bankruptcy. The Chancellor directed an issue, to
a prize. The match was to be determined in two have the matter tried at law, and the Jury found a
v
heats. At six o'clock the competitors started in gen.erdict for the defendant in the issue—viz. for those
who contended that the son had, in fact, made the
bridge, and proceeded against tide through the centre
tlemen's funnnies (not wherries), from Blackh tars-
sift in question. The subject now came again before
arch of Westminster-bridge, and thence round a boat his Lordship, upon a petition for an order, directing
a new trial of the question, or otherwise, that the as-
moored off Lambeth Palace. Ossotteee, of White.
friars, TURNER, Hungerford, and Josies, of the Old
signees of the estate of the son should be allowed at
Swan Stairs, London-bridge, took the lead, and kept least to prove under the commission against the
father for the sum of £2OOO, or thereabouts, one of
it, they coming in for the first heat. By the regula.
tions of the society, only three boats were permitted the children having died since the gift was made.
again to start ; the before-mentioned, at half-past Sir S. ROMILLY and Mr. MONTAGUE, for the peti-
tioner, a that the
seven o'clock, again set off for the second heat: they
rgued
verdict Was wrong, and
all.
proceeded up the river to Battersea Reach, where,
unfortunately for OSBOURNE, he ran foul of the gaUies Mr. HAn; Mr. HEALD, and Mr. RICHARDS con-
stationed on the western side of the river, and that tended, that though the evidence was liable to a great
mischance gave JOHN JONES an opportunity of, by deal of observation, yet the verdict of the Jury was
,4 a long pull and a strong pull," to get ahead of his I certainly found according to the preponderance of
antagonist. JONES went round the boats at Battersea;ersea, evidence. A Mr. Clarke, Lord Bridgewater's land
and returned to Vauxhall stairs, leading °mains e steward, had deposed that the father had, while he
only about a boat's length. The race was decided (Clarke) was present, observed that the son had
agreed to leave the debt of £5910 in his hands for
about half-past eight o'clock. The wherry was after-
wards exhibited to the company in the Gardens. It the benefit of the younger children, and that the son
was a very handsome one. The winnuer of the prize had not denied this, but had remained silent. Several
received it from the hands of Mr. SIMPSON, who thus other witnesses had deposed, that the son had ac-
addressed him on the occasion :
knowledged that he had made the provision in guts-
a Mr. JONILS, on the part of the Proprietor of Vauxhall Gar- tion for the younger children, but some stated, that
dens, it affords me infinite pleasure to declare you the undoutted he had at the same time observed that the agreement
winner of the Vauxhall Prize \Pi harry; and permit me to hope, I was not formal, not being in writing.
that as you have obtained her by dint of your own most honour- The LORD CHANCELLOR observed, that it was not
able exertions, so also may her timbers, which are truly British,
prove the stem and stem of your future wealth and prosperity!' sufficient to say, upon an application for a new trial,
The wherry was afterwards conveyed down the that the evidence was doubtful, and not in all re
River in triumph, with its streamers flying, accom- spects perfectly satisfactory as a foundation for the
panied by a vast number of pleasure-boats ;it was verdict. Before a new trial should be directed, it
landed at Whitehall, where the friends of the winner must appear that the verdict was so obviously wrong
assembled, and gave three cheers. The day was fine, that the:e might be a reasonable ground to conclude
and the spectators were numerous. that the verdict of another Jury might be different.
The English prisoners residing at large in Paris do It was clear that Clarke, the land steward, must have
conceived, from the observation of the father and the
not exceed fifty ; but the numerous resident English
housekeepers still reside there undisturbed. Miss Wis. silence of the son, that there was an agreement—as,
in mentioning the circumstance afterwards, he had
LIAMS has left Paris for the South of France. Lady Y.
lives in retirement, engaged in the education of her said that the father ought to give security, that the
children, and suffering much from ill health. Dr. sum should be duly paid to the younger children.
WATSON, the author of the Life of Fletcher, is dead. tinder these circumstances, his Lordship thought
hat there was nut, in the present case, that reason--
Mr. JOHN PERRY lives in much domestic comfort ear
the Palais Royale. Count Rustemto enjoys the favour able ground to believe that a new trial would pro-
and confidence of the French Government. duce a different decision as would authorize him to

LAW £WTELLIGENC

Mary Cliftorct, 'the widows or teputed widow, of
Edward Clifford, who was so barbarously murdered,
is now in the House of Correction. The confession
of Leary has not as yet been head to her, but it was
just hinted to . her that he confessed the deed, and
charged her with being concerned with MTh, which
seethed to Make no Impression upon her. She seemed
satisfied with her renteval there, on condition of ha-
ving liberty of seeing her children frequently. No-
thing in her conduct as yet has appeared to lead to a
suspicion of her guilt Her children were removed
yesterday from Mrs. JuKas's, in Market-street, Fitz-
roy-iquare, to Pancras Workhouse. it appears that
Leary's confession is correct, so far as that a person
of the name of Wm. Slattery; accompanied Mrs.
Clifford to her house) or room, in New-court, on the
Sunday, and that she and her husband had some tri-
fling dispute; that she snatched his hat from him,
and that he then went attd bought another—and also
that the deceased and Leary were drinking at the
house of one Griffith, in Church-street, St. Giles's,
on Sunday evening—but, on the other hand, it ap-
pears that Mrs. Clifford returned to her lodgings, in
Church-lane, about eleven o'clock on Sunday night:
that she lit her candle and remained at home for two
or three hours.

William Slattery before-mentioned, being a lodger
of Clifford's, slept in the same room, and was talking
to her when she came in, and she inquired of him if
her husband was come home He saw her go to
bed, and in a couple of hours after he saw her get up
as there was a candle burning in the room ; but he
then fell asleep, and did not see or hear her go out.
He attended at the Coroner's Inquest, but then his
evidence did not seem necessary. •
Leary's first confession before the Magistrates in
Hatton•garden, on his examination, entirely differs ,
from the last—he then laid no charge against the
wife of the deceased, although he heard her make so
serious a charge against htin ; buf stated, that he
parted from the deceased and his will at the end of
Ely-place; that they met two men there, who went
if in company with Clifford and his wife, and that
he (Leary) returned home.
It appears, that on the Monday morning, when the
body was found, Mrs. Clifford gave a man of the
name of Lawrence, who keeps a chandler's shop in
the same street in which she 'aged, £6, charging
him to take no notice of it. It also appears, that,
the deceased was not the father of the five children
she had with her, her first husband being dead. There
are reports as to whether she was married to Clifford
or not ; but she says that the little property in Ire-
land was her own, and that the deceased pressed her ,
to let him sell it, observing, that he would go to• Lo-
ndon, and would work and earn bread for her and
the children; and that as they were young, neither
they nor any body else•could ever tell but that he was
their lather. On those terms she accompanied him.

direct another With • the observation of the ton,
that the agreement was not in writing, WAS it%elt
evidence that an agreement by pdrf;le Ltd been en-
tered into ; 4nd if such an agreement had been for-
med by parole, it Was sufficient. He therefore orde-
red, that the proof Under the father's commis.ion
should be allowed for the benefit of the younger chit.
dren, but that it should be for £.1910, instead of
£(3000, and that the parties on all hands should bear
their own expenses; those of the assignees of father
and son to be paid out of their respective estates.

COUNCIL ROONLBSTOItt TIM VIC/PCHANCELLOIt.
BARTLIFF tl. BYRES.-DEMURRER.
A Mrs. Williamson having been entitled, in 1747,
to a copyhold estate in Yorkshire, she, along with
her husband, agreed to surrender the estate in ques-
tion, and signed -a document of consent to the surren-
der. The estate had sintte.passed by several convey-
ances, till it came at length into the p3ssession of a
trustee for Sir Mark Sykec.the defendant.

. _
A private Act of Parliament had passed in 1803,
by which a common, including the estate in question,
was divided and inclosed, and the estate allotted, by
the award of the Commissioners, to the trustee for
Sir Mark Sykes.
A bill was now filed, stating, that the surrender in
1747 was illegal and void, inasmuch as the wife, to
whom the estate belonged, hid net been privately
examined by the Lord of the Manor or his Steward,
or any person on their behalf, as to her willingnessto
surrender; and that such surrender could not, there-
fore , be sustained, inasmuch as such private exami-
nation of his wife was necessary in law to give vali-
dity to the transaction. The bill therefore prayed
that the surrender should be declared to be void, and
the estate to be in the plaintiff, the heir at law of the
:iip
wife, to whom the property h d so belonged in 1747.
'The bill also stated the Act arliament, and that
the legal estate was thereby to en tiom the plaintiff,
and a new estate created, to which the plaintiff had
only an equitable title , and that not being enabled
to proceed in a Court of Law by ejectment, he was
under the necessity of resorting to a Court of Equity
for relief. The bill prayed both for discovery and
relief. To this bill the defendant filled a general de-
murrer for want of equity, and the demurrer came
on to be heard bef
ore his Honour the VICK CHAN-
CELLOR.

Sir S. ROMILLY and Mr. HORNS, in support of the
demurrer, argued, that the bill was out of Court, even
upon its own statement—as this was a case of purely
legs! title, and that the remedy was at law, and not
in equity ; and 2d, that the relief was barred by the
Statute of Limitations.

Mr. HART and Mr. GARRETT, in support of the
bill, contended, that the remedy at law was taken
away by the award of the Commissioners under the
Act of Parliament. The plaintiff had the legal title
before, but by the Act of Parliament the legal tide
was vested in the trustee for Sir Mark Sykes, and
that in equity such trustee was in reality a trustee for
the plaintiff, and ought*to be decreed to convey the
legal estate to him. That as lo the time the Statute
of Limitations did not attach when the Act of Par-
liament was passed, and that the time ought now to
be considered as only.having begun to run since the
passing of that Act of Parliament.
The VICK-CHANCELLOR was of opinion that this
was dearly a title at law. If the legal title passed
by Act of Parliament, in the usual construction" of
the effect of an Act of the Legislature, neither a
Court of Law nor a Court of Equity could disturb
that tide. But then tt might be said that this was a
private Act et Parliament, and merely a common as-
surance, though of a very high nature. If it was a
common assurance, then it could not have barred the
effect of the Statute of Limitations; for in that case
it must be regarded as an ordinary coveyance, and
upon the same footing with the other intermediate
conveyances by whick this estate had passed. If the
Act was of the nature of a common assurance, it
could not alter the title at law, which was as open to
prosecution as before, unless barred by the lapse of
time. In any view of the case, therefore, there was
no ground for the interference of equity. A mere
bill of discovery might, indeed, have been admitted,
in order to enable the plaintiff to proceed at law, if
he had any case to present for the consideration of a
Court of Law : but when a bill went on to pray for
relief as well as discovery, where there was no ground
for the relief, it was an established rule that the whole
bill was bad, and that a general demurrer would
hold. In his opinion, therefore) the demurrer must
• be allowed.
it

BELFAST, Jul.: 31.—0 n Monday last, a fatal affray
took place at Garvigh, county of Derry. It was the
fair day, and a large body of those deluded men, stil-
ing themselves Ribbon men, assembled in that town,
some letters say to the amount of 1,500, with a de-
termination to take summary vengeance on a peace-
able inhabitant (one Davidson, a publican), who
occasionally gives admission to Freemasons and
Orangemen. Two lodges of the latter, and one of
the former, were in the habit of periodically meeting
there. None of these, however, were present on this
occasion ; the meditated vengeance was therefore
likely to fall upon the house and its owner, and upon
the various insignia deposited there, as characteristic
of the associations they represented. Fortunately, the
' landlord of the house got some intimation of the visit
intended him, some time before it actually took
place ; a few friends were consequently privately in-
troduced, who were prepared.to assist in the entertain-
; meal of so many guests, and, if necessary, to give
them a warm reception. The assailants, being ind►si.
dually decorated with the distinguishing badge of a
white handierchil tied round the middle of the bcely,
were not slack in their approaches, little dreaming,
it w culd appear, of the preparations that await'd
them. On the attack commencing, several shots were
fired over their heads, the contents of wh ch whistled
among the trees behind them, whose fugitive branches
indicated that they were not fired from bland cartridges.
As usual, however, this forbearance only tended t•-)
ewperate the mob. The pieces were then levelled
to do execution. Several then immediately fell, and
a lieneral flight and pursuit instantly commenced
It is stid three persons were killed on the spot, and
several of them have since died of their wounds.—
Next day, a Liege body of Orangemen and Freema-
sonsassembled from the adjacent country and villages,
and paraded the streets of Garragh, without the
shatiew opFcsizion.

• . e . 41- 8672 E's., _ •

WINCHESTER, JULY s!.
1112 RING v. IPORTHINGTON9FOIt A FORGERY.
This trial was put off from the I !st Assizes, owing
to the absence of a material witness on the part of the
- prisoner ,• and is now again' postponed until the Marclp
Assizes, from a similar -cause. • '
THE ICING to: BINGHAM i
Mr. Serjeave Peet,. who was Counsel for the prol.
secution, at sortletength stated the nature efahh-easef
He Lamented . that he was under the -necessity of
bringing forward such evidence as he was about to
do, against a Gentleman clothed with the honourable
offices of a Magistrate and Clergyman. But, be con-
tinued, unless the defendant could produce a large
body of evidence to deny what was- to be laid before
the Jury, he must be found guilte. The indictment
was very long and complex, and the charges which it
contained will be best gathered from a statement of
the evidence on the pan of the prosecution, of which
the following is the substance :
James Cooper, a victualler, at Gosport, stated the
defendant, Mr. Bingham, to be a Magistrate and a
Clergyman of that place; that he became acquainted
with- him several years since, and had constantly con-
ducted money concerns with the defendant, consider-
ing him as his banker. That in the year 1810, Cooper
entesed into a treaty with a Mr. Sweet, at Gosport,
for the purchase of two houses on the beach there.—
'Mr. Cooper offered for those-houses 600 guineas, and
Mr. Sweet demanded £7OO. Mr. Cooper then kept
tie public-house called the Dover Castle, at Gosport.
Nothing was at this- time finally agreed upon.—
Cooper mentioned the circumstance to the defen-
dant, who dissuaded him from making the pur-
chase. Some time afterwards, the defendant sent for
Cooper, who, in company with his wife, waited on
him, when he informed Cooper that a person named
Watts had bought the houses, and that he (Cooper)
might have them for 82200; adding, that the license
of a public house, called the Audacious and Revolue
sioneaire, which formerly stood on Gosport beach,
and had been for seven years past purchased of the
defendant by Government, and pulled down, might
be removed to the premises for which this great ad.
vance of price was demanded, the two houses being
previously formed into one; that the expense of for-
ming them into ene would be only about £3OO, and
that, when, finished, it would make a better public
house than the Artgel. Cooper, surprised at such as
increase is the price of these premises, told the de:
. fendant that he could not think of buying them. Mr.
Bingham desired him to go home and consider about
it. Cooper went away, and in about the course of
a week came to-a resolution to purchase the houses,
atthe sum demanded, which was to include £l5O,
the consideration for the license. This sum of £l5O,
it was agreed,-should be deducted from the purchase
money, and paid to -Mr. Nicholas Breach, the late
landlord of the Audacious and Revohitionnaire,
which had beet pulled down. Mr. Cooper farther
stated, that Mr. Bingham proposed to him to insert
41900 in the conveyance deed at the consideration
Inoney for the houses, instead of 82200, for the pm--
pose of saving ti.e stamp duty of £lO, and suggested
that the conveyance should be prepared in London,
that no cite iii Gosport might know of it. The
conveyance was executed by Mr. Watts, the per.
son before stated to be the purchaser of the houses,
but who appeared to be only the agent of Mr. Bing-
ham, as the latter received the purchase money, de-
ducting ‘fifteen . hundred pounds, which, according
to the testimony of Cooper, was at that time due to
himself on the balance of accounts between him and
the defendant. It appeared that :he new licence
was granted in the name of Breach, the tenant of the
old Audacious and Revolutionaire, and that Eliza-
beth Breach, a niece of the former, lived there a short
time. Mrs. Cooper, wife.of the before named witness,
deposed nearly to the same effect. The testimony of
these two persons founded the ground-work of the
case on the part of the prosecution.
Mr. JEKYLL. when the proofs c f the adverse party
had been gone .through with, rose on the part of
the defendant, axd for a great length of time ad-
dressed the Jury with arguments of n-atch force and
ability against the probability of these charges, and
laid some stress on the impropriety of suffering the
character. of a Gentleman, holding such situations
as were held by Mr. Bingham, to be for ever ruined
. by the statement of those persons who admitted to
have conspired with him in the attempt to defraud
the revenue of the stamp duty of 0310.. • The evi.
dence for the defendant varied in some respects, the
appearance of the transaction, particularly. as to the
balance of accounts beteeen Mr. Cooper and the de-
. feadant at the time of the puichase, which was now
raid to be in far‘an• of Mr. Bingham. These were the
leading points of evidence produced for and against
this prosecution, which principally went to charge the
defendant with the illegally obtaining and selling a
public-house license, and with the evasion of the
Stamp duties.
The JUDGE carefully recapitulated the evidence,
and the Jury returned a verdict of Guilty.
The trial lasted upwards of eight hours. Sentence
will be passed in the Court of King's Bench.
AIDING FILLIONERS OF MAR.
Rickard Irelhi, brought- by Habeas Corpus, July
19, frnmahe goal at Salisbury, he standing indicted
at the last Assize, for unlawfully; wilfully, and fe-
loniously aiding and assisting -Gaspard Henry Van
Tilhargh, and others, then .being alien enemies of his
Majesty, and prisoners of war at large, on parole at
Andover, to escape from his Majesty's dominions.
Mr. .1. H. Todd deposed, that he is the Agent,
having the prisoners at Andover, that on the Ist day
of October, between seven and eight in the evening,
the eight French prisoners were at Andover ;—their
limits are not to go beyond a mile on the virnpike-
road, from the town. Ow -the 2d, they were missing
by eight in the morning. Gaspard Henry Van Til-
bore stated, that he is-a native of Brussels ; that in
the inoeth of September last, he' was a prisoner of
war, on parole at Andooer. - On the Ist of October,
about s...ven in the evening, be left Andover, in com•
pany with several other (Akers, and on turning into
a cross-road, they were met by two men named
Lodge and Calieford, who were furnished with two
bor,es.asid some provisions. They accompanied these
men about six mites, when, on the signal of a whistle,
the prisoner came up with three other horses, where-
upon witness and the other fugitives, with Lodgear.di

r.'ullefora, mounted two on each horse, and proceeded
I,y cross-roads towards Ringwood' Obe prisoner at
the bar attending on root as their guide.. They arr
rrived •at Ringwood about five o'clock the next mor,.
ning, but not choosing to go into the town, were core
ducted to a neighbotmng wood by Welsh and Lodgel,
where they remained until three o'clock, at which
time Welsh and Lodge brought them briad, cheesei,
beer, and rum and, having agaidleft them, return.
ned about eight o'clock in the evening, with Culler
ford and the horses j they then' proceeded towarc4
Christchurch, in the same manner as'befote. Welsh
still attending turfoot. - They 'reached Christchurch
about three o'clockoin the morning ; when Culleford
took away the horses ; Welsh and Lodge conducting
them to the coast. Welsh then went to look out fot
a boat ; but not finding any, the officers again rei•
treated to a wood hard by, where provisions were
brought the m by Culleford and Lodge. After re-
'maining there until the 12th of October, a boat was
engaged, and they embarked for Cherbourg;—but
the wind proving contrary, they were obliged to re-
turn, having been several hours at sea. The officers
had given Lodge and Culleford ses2, and bargained
to give them 600 guineas More' when they should
reach the French coast. The truth of this statement
was supported by a variety of otherevidence ; when,
•after an able summing up, by the Learned Judge,
the Jury returned a verdict of Guilty—Fourteen years
transportation.

HERTFORD, AUGUST S.

PHIPPS V. PEARMAN.

This case was an issue out of the Court of Chan-
cery, to try the tight of tithes arising out of the ham.
let of Luffenall, in this county ; and the question
as, whether the hamlet of Luffenall•belonged to the
parish of Yardley, or the parish of Clothall ?
Mr. Serjeant Summits, for the plaintiti, stated,
that tithes, from time immemorial, were taken of the
hamlet, by the parish of Yardley ; but there was
this singularity, that the Vicar of Yardley had paid
£l5 to Clothall, unquestionably for some portion of
the tithes, but what that portion was is was not easy
to ascertain. They had also an ancient document, of
the time of Edward I. as antiquaries seemed to agree,
and in that document Yardley was granted cum
Luffenall, which seemed to imply, that Luffenall was
then considered as a part of Yardley. There was also
an ancient indictment against .a road in Luffenall.
street, in the parish of Yardley. The description in
the indictment would shew, that Luffenall-street was
then considered as in the parish of Yardley. He
should also produce an old terrier, which stated that
two-thirds of the tithes belonged to Yardley, and one-
third, if there should be a fall third, to Clothall. What
the latter expression meant, " if there should be a full
third," he confessed he did not very well understand.
He should also produce a land-tax assessment, in
which the hamlet of Luffenall was rated as a part of
Yardley. On these documents, he contended that the
evidence clearly essablished Luffenall to be part of
the parish of Yardley.
The several documents were then put in and read ;
but with respect to the assessment on the land, it ap.
peared to be entitled, " a Rate for the oats and barley
due to the King by composition for Yardley."
The LORD CIIIEF JUSTICE doubted the propriety
of receiving this, as it did not appear to be an assess-
ment made by virtue of an Act of Parliament kr-it
was dated 1633. He thought some. account ought
to be given as to the histoo of this sort of rate. The
marriages and burials were also very few.
Mr. Serjeant BEST, for the defendant, commented
on the above evidence wi h his usual ingenuity, and in
answer produced a variety of perambulations of the
parish of Clothall, in which they included Luffenall
as part of that parish ; he also adduced some docu-
ments as. ei idence to thq same effect.—The Jury
found for the defendant.—The Assized finished.