Star.
London, England, 1826-05-11 00:00:00

CHEVALIER RUSPINI'S MEDICINES.

riIHE CHEVALIER RUSPINI begs to inform the
1 Nobility, Gentili, and the Public, that he has appointed Mr.
CIIARLLS Binza, i, Cheapside, Agent for the Sale of his Me-
dicines, viz. the Dcntrihce and Tincture for Beautifying and Pre-
serving the Teeth and Gums, and fastening those Teeth that are
loose; his Elixir fur curing the Tooth-ache; and the Balsamic
Styptic for stopping all Bleedings external and internal. They ate
now prepared by the Cnavauxa, from the original Receipt of
kis Father.

SOW by Butlers, Chemists, 4, Cheapside, corner of St. Paul's,
London ; 54, Sackville-stret, Dublin ; and 73, Prince's•street,
Edinburgh ; Smyth and Nephew, Perfumers, New Bond-street;
and the principalMedicineVenders throughout the United Kingdom.
ry• 7 he above Medicines cannot be Genuine, unless the Name
of the " Chevalier J. B. Ruspini" is engraved no the Government
Stamp, which is attached to each Da and Bottle.

When we are anxiously expecting the I emitinder of
the message of the Secretary of Finsince, the public •tio
of which commenced iu the last number of the ablve
Paper, we were surprised on seeing it intett opted, from
circumstances which are indistinctly stated, a Id which
we could have wished had been c'early explained.
among other reasons, in order that no one might venture
to suppose that the executive had the least share is the,
stopp.ige of its publication.* But cur astoaishment,l
and that of every Colombian, a lover of his country,
would not have been so great, if, instead of the ahoy.
message, they had n t publis' ed the st•itenielit of Of
receipts of the Nati-nal Treasury, and the estimates 0.
the future expenditure, without an explanation of 11-,y
kind. These documents, presented by themselves, are
Ey nn means favourable to the Republic ; so far from
it, indeed, that it is to be feared they may produce a
disagreeab!e sensation in Europe. To do away a ith
this as much as pus ible, and explain the real state of
ings, we have thought the following observations
might be serviceable to Colombia, to which we take V.e
liberty of calling the attention of the public of Europe.
The amount of the estimates of expenditure for the
p;esent year, 182(1, in all the departments of adminis
tration, is 13,487,719 Jillars Sirs. which, compated
with the average amount of our revenue, which is
6,196,725 dollars 3rs. leaves an annual deficit of
9 230,994 do;larsoir. 7 hex fi 4 ores are certainly much
against the republic ; but it is necessary to take into
consideration, that the estimates are calculated for a
period of active warfare, and on the supposition that all
the branches of the administration be placed on the most
complete footing of organization.
The actual expenses during the year 1826 will not
require 15,000,000 dollars, as we shall presently show,
by a reference to the estimates, and by observations
which have been kindly made to us by one of the mem-
bers of the committee of finance of the Chamber of
Representatives.
DEPARTMENT Ow FOREIGN APPAIRS.—This estimate
amounts to 295,762 dollars, 7irs. and has been calcu-•
lated on the supposition that all the Legations in Eu-
rope and America, Consulates, &c. be established ; but
as, at this moment, there are only two Legations in
Europe, and almost all those in America are served by.
Charges d'Affaires, whose salaries are much less than
those of Ministers, we conceive that the above sum may
be reduced one half in a care of necessity or urgency,
and consequently an expense saved of 142,331 dollars,4r.
DEPAATMENT ow THE INTERIOR.—This estimate
amounts to 621,431 dollars, Ir. but from it is to be de.
ducted what is not paid to those Members of Congress
for the;r{ravelling expenses, when they ate residents in.
this city, which many of them are—the sums not paid
to those members of Congress who fill any other civil,
military, or ecclesiastical situation in the republic—the
expenses of the Courts of Justice of the Orinoco, Zyulia,
Apure, Magdalena, Cauca, and Guayaquil—and the
pay of those military men who occupy the posts of In-
tendants or Governors of Provinces. We cannot exactly
state the amount these several items produce, but it
cannot be under 100,000 dollars.
WAR DEPARTMENT.—The estimate amounts to
6,503,296 dollars, Ir. and the deductions to be made, as
specified by the Secretary of this department, are the
following :—From the extraordinary expences, a million
of dollars, as there will be no use for them, if the Re-
public continues in its present state of internal tran-
quillity; the pay and rations of seven battalions now
in Peru, 799,096 dollars, because so long as they remain
there, there is no necessity to maintain them from our
treasury; the pay and rations of five squadrons of ca-
valry, likewise in Peru, 197,940 dollars, for the same
reason ; 350,000 dollars for cavalry rations, because
this expense would only be incurred in the event of a
campaign; 100,000 dollars, hospital expenses, as con-'
tracts can be made upon more favourable terms, and'
sickness is not so likely to prevail among the troops;
100,000 dollies, pay of those officers who may retire
from the service, as the nation need not maintain
gteater armed force than is necessary; 2 0,000 dollars,
the pay of four battalions, which have been allowed for
in case they should be required to complete our army,
with war establishment; as likewise 300,000 dollars,
which are deducted in consequence of other battalions
not having their full complement. These several items
, amount to 2,987,036 dollars, independent of the sums
sshich are nut paid to general officers who form part of
the Administration.

DILPA itThIENT OF THB NAVY.—This e.tinute amounts
to 4,809,077 dollats 41 rs. from which a million and a
hall of dollars may be deducted, as all the vessels of
war which have been estiinved for are not yet fit lot
service, and the etimates for damages, repairs, &c.
may bu over-rated.

fhPARTMENT Off .FINANCE.--Heie the only deduc-
tion that can be made is in the sum for the pyinent
of interest on the foreign debt; for as, during the last
two years, a capital of 600,000 dollars has been paid
oft; there is 36,000 dollars less to pay.
Total amount of sums to be deducted:

Dollars.
Foreign affairs 142,531 4
interior • 100,000 0
. •
• . .
War • 2,987,036 0
• .
Navy • • 1,500,000 0
• Finance • 36,900 0
. • •

Total • f 4,665,367 4

And therefore the estimate of the whole
expenditure is reduced to . . 10,822,351 7i
The amount of our revenue, limited in the statements
published by the Constitutional to 6,196 725 dollars 3rs.
will be increased—first, by the debt of Peru to Colom-
bia for the furnishing troops, and military supplies,
which, although the amount is not yet known, cannot
be less than 3,000.000 of dollars : 2.11 y, by the net ba-
lance remaining from the loan of 1824 at the disposal
of the Government, and which we may imagine cannot
be less than 2.000,000 of. d •liars : 3dly, by the sums
from the same loan, furnished to the mints and factories
of tobacco ; 4thly, by the interest at 6 per cent. on the

• The Government has directed that this message should be
printed, the same as the others; accompanied with such documents
as may be judged necessary by the Secretary of Finance. All the
other messages have already been printed.
Remark—An error in the Addition of 100,000 doll.as.

RESPONDENT. •
This case, which was postponed a few weeks sinceon
the ground of informality in the proceedings, was opened
to-day before the LORD CHANCELLOR. A property of
neatly 20,0001. a year depends upon the issue. The uncle
of the respondent, the lite James Earl of Fife, died in
the year 1809, possessed of a large entailed property,
besides extensive estates, which he held in fee simple.—
The disposal of these estates formed the subject of vat ions
deeds of settlement, executed at different times, during
several years preceding his death. By a trust deed, exe-
cuted at Duff House on the 7th of October 1808, his
whole let...simple estates were disposed to certain trus-
tees, of whom the appellant is one. This disposal of
his property arose from some cause of dissatisfaction
with his nephew. The testing clause of that deed is in
these words-411n witness whereof, these presents writ-
ten on this and the three preceding pages of paper, lea
gaily stamped, are subscribed by me, at Duff House,
the 12th day of November 1808 years, before these wit-
nesses, Alexander F. Williamson and George Wilsan,
at Duff House." James E srl of Fife died on the 6th of
January 1809, and was succeeded in his titles and
family entailed estates by his brother Alexander, the
late Earl of Fife, who was, however, excluded by the
trust deed, from all enjoyment of the trust estates ; and.
who permitted the trustees to enter into the possession.
and administration of these estates without challenge.
—Earl Alexander survived his brother more than two
years, and died in 1811. By' his death, the succession
devolved on his eldest son, the respondent. He also
allowed the settlements of his uncle and the possession
of the trustees to continue undisputed for several years.
In the year 1814, however, nearly six years after the
death of Earl James, he raised an action for setting
aide the deeds aiready mentioned. - The grounds of
reduction may be stated as resolvi 1g into four heads.
1. That Lord Fife, at the time of executing the deeds,
vi as blind to such a degree as to be incapable of dis-
tinguishing objects. That in respect of that blindness,
it was legally incompetent for him to execute such
deeds by his own subscription ; and that he could only
perform such a legal act by t')e intervention of two
notaries and four witnesses. 2. That Earl James was
assisted in making his subscription to the said deeds.—
S. That the deeds had not been read over to James
Earl of Fife at the time if his signing them. 4. That
one of the instrumentary witnesses did nat see the
granter subscribe, nor hear him acknowledge his
subscription. This inquiry was the subject of various
proceedings in the Courts of Scotland, down to 1823 ;
the result of which, declaratory ef the invalidity of the
trust deed, was favourable to the claim of Lord Fife.—
In 1823, the appellant brought the judgment of the
Courts below, in so fit as they were untavourable to
him, under the review of the House of Lords, who, after
heating Counsel for eight days, sent the case back
again, ordering the Court of Session to direct an issue,
to try whether the instruments of trust disposition and
deed of entail, both dated tl,e 7th day of October IEOB,
sought to be reduced, being in raw probat've instruments
were not, or either of them, was not the deeds or deed
of the Earl of Fire ? The issue was accordingly direct-
ed, and the trial took place on the 9.h March 1825. •
The single objection which the pursuer, the Earl of
Fife,attempted to establisli,was the non-ac kaowledgment
by the Earl of Fife, of his subscription of the trust. deed
and deed of entail, of the 7th day of Octiber, 1808, to
George Wilson, the instrumentary witness who had not
seen him subscribe. Vali rus witnesses were called to
make out that negative; and on the part of the appellant
it was maintained that, independently of the insufficiency
of the evidence, the non-acknowledgment by the Earl.
even if proved, was not in itself fatal to the validity of
the deeds. The Lord Chief-Commissioner, the presiding
Judge, laid it down to the Jury, that the absence of
acknowledgment was of itself latal to the deeds. The
Jury found that, in respect of the matters proven before
them, they find that the instruments of trust-disposition
and deed of entail, both dated the 7th of October, 1808,
were not the deeds of the Earl of Fife. On the part of
the appellant, an exception was taken to the direcoon
of the Lord Chief-Commissioner, on the following
ground That the Lord Chief Commisiuner did
direct the Jury, if they were satisfied that the evidence
given, on the part of the pursuer, established that the
granter of the deed had not acknowledged his subscrip.
Lion to the witness, who di,l not see him subscribe the
said deed, to find, by their verdict, that the said deed
WAS not the deed of the Earl of Fife; and did then and
there tell the jury, that the law reqaired, in cases in
which a witness does not see the granter of a deed sign
the deed, that he must ack,losledge his subscription to
such witness, othrrw ise the (iced is void in law, and
therefore is not the deed of the granter. Whefeupon
the said (29uosel for the defenders did then and, there