Star.
London, England, 1829-06-29 00:00:00

MONDAY EVENING, JUNE 29, 1829.

FRENCH PAPERS.

flak THS GAUTTIC DZ lAMICIt, JIM 27.

PARIS, Jams *4.

The accounts from Gfeece say, that 'in the election,
which are now making for the approaching National
Assembly, several districts have named Count Capo
d'lstria for their representative. The Courier de Swims
says, that this result is owing to violence or intrigue,
and add, that the President is supposed to intend to
get the National Asieribly to declare, by a majority
of the Members, that it cannot attend to the affairs of
the-nation till the limits at least are finally settled; and to
request him testoll6mm to govern as he does at present.
M. Thuriot. Member of the National Coniention,l
who was Advocate General in the Court of Caseation,,
under the Empire, deed lately at Brussels, where be
bad lived reared ever since 1816. Thuriot acted as
Advhcate General of the tribunal which tried Georges,
and Moreau, in 18134.

Plums Illinos—Pa au, JeWalle.—Floa per CaseLllolf.
Thies per Gott. 79f. 70s.—oRsole • Stotts, I.ll2ol,—.N•pin &wk.
NM (ft.—Royal Spaniel' Lass, 7 sL—Spaaish Ramos Perpetoollo.
401. 80c.—Haytiao Loan, 450L—Rachaogaon Loodoaposte moth,
ii5L 15c. ; duet months, 251. 30c.

GERMAN PAPERS.

ODESSA, Ants s.

According to accounts Irern Sizeboli of .29th May,
the Turks before that phiee had become much more
numerous, and a serious attack was expected. The
Sultan is said to have commanded the recovery.of the
fortress io the true Oriental style. Great preparations,
however, and much time are required i4r a regular
siege, and the place is too strong for a coup de mix.—
It is said that the Capitan Pacha's fleet has appeared
again in the Black Sea., and has been seen from the Bay
of Bourgas. and that Admiral Gieig has sent a disibion
of his fleet t. meet it.

The last accounts from Constantinople do not men-
tion that the Capitan Pscha had put to ►ea again.

BUCHAREST. im S.

We bear nothing further of the sallies reported to,
have been made on the by the Pacha of .Stlistria.—
We learn, however, frnm the villages near the Danube,
that the cannonade gives reason to suppose that there
are dully engagements.
Within these few days there have been fresh victims
to the plague. It most be imagined hew trade must
butler from this scourge. Most of the Boyards and Other
considerable have retired to the country: The
Government has, hc.wever, ordered the strictest precae-
tions, and it is hoped they will sufficeto pteventlittlier
diiaisters.

PARLIAMENTARY PAPER.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS ON THE LAW
OF REAL PROPERTY.
(Continued front oor Paper of Satorday.)
We deem it proper to mention as discreditable to the
law,•the attendant doctrine of an entry to ovoid the,
fine.—an idle ceremony required to be gone through by
the rightful owner of an estate, of which a fine with
proclamations has been unjustly levied, before be can
commence proceedings to recover his property, and,
established as the point of time, from which, when he
has teeovered it, he is entitled to the rents and profits.
This ceremony is supposed to give•netice of-the adverse
claim to the person in possession ; bat it is equally a
fiction with the notice ►upposed to be given by the pro-
clansations to the rightful owner, and in practice, the
party who gives in evidence a fine with proclamations
never knows whether bis opponent can prove an entry
to avoid it.

If twenty years should be established as the general
period of limitation, we conceive the prisciple thakpre-
sceiption dues not run against persons incapable of suing
must be preserved, although it might be disregarded
if ji,louger period were prefeired. But the searches
upon alienition, which the doctrine at disabilities ren•
den necessary, appears to us to .bra len' earl thaw
would be the encoding in egret, case the period of limi•
ration tosuch a limit Is could safely be tiled as a bar,
if disabilities were disregarded.
The disabilities now recognized are infancy, corer-,
tore, lunacy, abience beyond seas, and imprisonment.
The first four, we think, should condone. With respect
to lunacy. it has been urged, that in analogy to the pro-
visions of some foreign codes, the period should begin
to run from the appointment of a committee under a
.cninniission of lunacy; but it seems to us, that rights
might be lost from the negligence or collusion of a c.m.
mime as well as of a guardian or a ha band. •
At present, the period does not begin to run against
a person resident in Ireland, although he is likely to be
equally cognizant of his rights, and equally capable of
enforcing .them, as if he were domiciled in England.
We propose, that the privilege allowed to absence be.
yond seas shall be restricted to absence from the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, including.the
islands of Guernsey, Jersey, and Alderney, and the Isle
of Man: •

The disability of imprisonment we think should be
erstuely abolished. When it was established,. long and
rgorous confinement in distant gaols was not 'memo-
mon; but Now imprisonsbent, whether .under civil or
criminal prosiest, is of short and defined duration; and
during its continuance the party has ample means of
communication with friends and professional advisers.
We recommend that the period allowed for entering
or bringing an ;salon, atter disability removed, should
continue to be ten ,pars.

Although it. has ilWays been held that if the period
once begins to run, it shall run on notwithstanding dis-
abilities subsequently arising; and that the claimant
whii is heir to a person dying under disability, even it
under disability himself when the right accrued to him,
if be would avail himself of the disability, must bring
his action within ten •years after Lis disability is re-
moved, it has never bee.' expressly determined whether
the operation of the Statute of L-mitations shall be
arrested during successive disabilities, the dicta the
Judges being contradictory upon this point. lu accord-
ance with the sentiments of Lord Ellenborough and the
Jii•les of the-King's Bench, we think it should be de-
clared t at successive disabilitiev are not to be regarded;
aud.that at ten years or more have expired flora the
Rime when the tight accrued to a party dying under
disability, ten years only shall be showed to the heir,
whether under di•abitity or n- t.• It is exceedingly im-
probable that there s'.ould be a succession of persons
neglecting or betraying the interests of others confided
to them; and the risk of this seems a much less evil
than the insecur•ty to titles which a contrary role would
occasion; for it is easy t.) imagine ititancy, coverture,
lunacy, and absence beyond the seass so to follow one
another with respect to a particular line of heirs, that
by successive disabilities the period of limitation might
be i,idefinitely protracted ; and it is to be remembered
mat in every transaction with a purchaser, evidence

may b: required,to disprove ibis supposable caie.
The existence even of she privilege doting a whole
hriwever long, with an addition of ten years, is an
evil of no inconsi.lerable magnitude; and as what is
termed disability does nut amount to absolute incapa-
, city, but poly to a degree of infirmity, and, as after a cer-
tain lapse of time the hardship of putting the pity in
possession to defend his original right, exceeds, the
Hardship of barring the craim of the party 0ut...0f
,pos.
session, notwithstanding such infirmity, we think-that
there should be a period, of adverse possession, after
which all claims !against which the possession was ad-
verse shall be barred, notwithstanding any disabilities
whatever ; and for this petpose we propose a period of
lofty years. Such a provision does not seem so.gieat
an infringement upon the maxim in favour of persons
inea,mble.of suing, as the established doctrine,,tbat
wlleit'the statute has once begun to run, it runs on not-
Wit!istitsding a subsequent disability; according to
*tech, if a father is disseised, and immediately dies,
leaving a new born son his heir, the heir is barred be-
fore he is of age. This latter. doctrine, indeed, we
scarcely should have ventured to propbse, were it not.
established law. Yet, notwithstanding its apparent ri-
gour, wt do not recommend any alteration of it, be.
cause we have not been able to learn any instance in
which it has practically worked injustice.
In delence of the proposal of an absolute period of
limitation disregarding disabilities, we would observe
that it is exceedingly improbable a valuable right
should have accrued to a married woman, or to a lu-
natic, or to a person beyond seas, and should have been
allowed to remain dormant for a period of forty years.
On the other hand the danger must not be overlooked,
that-the person in possession, by the impaired memory
of witnesses, by their death, and by the loss of docu-
ments, may be deprivert.of the means which he may
.have once possessed of establishing his right.
We may observe, that from the inquiries we have
made, the exceptions in favour of disabilities do not ap-
pear to be of much practical importance to persons in
' 'Whose favour they are provided. We have season to
think that the rights of persons labouriog under disabi-
lities are by no means usually neglected. The circum-
stance of it. being yet undecided, whether a succession
of disabilities shall be allowed, tends powerfully to show
that when rights have accrued to persons under disabi-
bdity, they.have been enforced' during the usual period
of limitation; and cousequendy the proposed abridge-