The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-06-14 00:00:00

Man. and Leeds:.

Midland Counties. 9761
Newcas. Sc Carlisle —

New. &N. Shields 16085
North & Eastern . 9104
North Midland ..

North Union .. 3529
Preston and Wyre 1426
Sheffield & Man.; 8064
South Eastern.... 22551
Ulster
York& N. Midland 80741

ROMISH CANON LAW ABOVE THE LAW OF

THE LAND

(From the Dublin Evening Mail.)

An extraordinary scene of litigation has just taken place at
the Swords Petty Sessions. It was cause and cross-cause
between the proprietor of a seat in the Roman Catholic cha-
pel of Ballyboghill, county of Dublin, and certain beggars,
labourers, and others, who took and held forcible possession
of it. A riot took place and blows were struck whilst the
priest was administering on the altar—the rev. gentleman
was involved in the melee. The whole occurrence was the
more indecent, as the disputed pew lies within the precincts
of the sanctuary.
The origin of this fracas, as we collect from the evidence
reported elsewhere, was pretty much as follows :—Four years
ago the chapel of Ballyboghill was rebuilt, partly.on the old
site, and partly on ground the property of Mr. Byrne. Mr.
Byrne had, moreover, been so zealous and active in the re-
edifice that, out of the £lOOO raised for the purpose, his own
contributions, and the subscriptions collected by him,
amounted to six hundred pounds. In consideration of such
services, and the gentleman's rank and character, Mr. Byrne
either stipulated, or was permitted, by the Rev. Mr. Cana-
van, then the Roman Catholic parish priest, to erect a pew
for himself and family, in the sanctuary : that is to say, with-
in the railed space that surrounds the altar ; and of this pew
he continued to hold undisturbed and unenvied possession,
until a few months ago, when " a Pharoah, that knew not
Joseph," succeeded Mr. Canavan in the parish ; and having
discovered that the Roman canons forbad the erection of pews
within the sanctuary, proceeded to have Mr. Byrne's seat re-
moved to the gallery. Mr. Byrne resisted, and had his pew
restored to its original place; and the consequence was, that
on going to chapel on the succeeding Sunday, he found the
seats of himself, his wife and daughters, preoccupied by a
host of paupers, who, claiming a full equality with the gentry,
both in rank and rights of property, had, voluntarily, and of
their own motion, obtruded themselves into that distinguished
place. Such is the statement of the witnesses.
With the subsequent matter of litigation we have nothing
to do. We care not whether the canon law of Rome do or
do not regulate the sittings in a Roman Catholic place of
worship. This canon is not acknowledged by the law of the
land. The reason why we advert to the case is this : be-
cause it strikingly exhibits the perverse fealty of the Roman
Catholic priesthood to the laws of a foreign judicature, in
contempt of the laws of the realm of which they are the natu-
ral born subjects, and to which they, as well as their fellow-
countrymen, are bound to pay obedience. If Mr. Byrnes
pew were illegally erected, there are laws and statutes of our
own, binding enough to abate the wrong and establish the
right ; and we cannot but say that priests, who set up a fo-
reignjurisdiction in preference, teach badly, by example, the
order and obedience to the laws of the land, which it is their
moral, as well as their civil duty to observe themselves, and
inculcate upon others.

FRANCIS AND COOPER.—The sessions of the Central Cri-
minal Court commenced on Monday (yesterday), and from
the appearance of the calendar made up on Friday night,
there being upwards of 200 prisoners for trial, they are likely
to occupy a week or twelve days. The judges who are ap-
pointed to adjudicate at the trials of the assassin John
Francis, for shooting at her Majesty the Queen, and the
prisoner Thomas Cooper, the highwayman and murderer of
of the unfortunate policeman, Daly—are Lord Chief Justice
Tindal, Mr. Justice Patteson, and Mr. Baron Gurney. It
is not yet ascertaified whether Francis will traverse over to
the next sessions in July. If not, his trial will be proceeded
with in the Old Court on Thursday next, and that of Cooper
on Friday. The latter prisoner has entirely recovered from
the effect of the poison he swallowed prior to the commission
of the murder.

JULIA GRIST.—The suit instituted by Mdme. de Melcy
against her husband for a separation de corps was determined
on Wednesday se'nnight by the Tribunal de Premiere In-
stance. M. de Melcy having made no opposition, the court,
upon the requisition of M. Glanday, the avoue of the fair
complainant, and without any argument of counsel, delivered
judgment, pronouncing for the separation to the following
effect :—Considering that the marriage between M. and
Mdme. de Melcy was celebrated in London on the 26th of
April, 1836—that in January, 1839, the complainant was
constrained by the ill-treatment of her husband to quit the
conjugal dwelling, but afterwards made ineffectual efforts to
return—that in order to withdraw himself from her just
remonstrances, M. de Melcy quitted Paris, and concealed
the place of his abode ; that he afterwards formally refused
to receive her, answering her appeals to him either by insult-
ing reproaches or contemptuous silence—that in November,
1841, on her return to Paris to fill her engagement at the
Italian Opera, she found that M. de Melcy had taken pos-
session of the Chateau Vaucresson, which is her own
property, and on her making known to him her intention to
come and live there, she was insultingly forbidden to enter,
and that M. de Melcy had in the same manner treated a
formal summons by a hussier, and another by a justice of the
peace ; and finally quoting the articles of the Civil Code ap-
plicable to the case in question, declares M. de Melcy sepa-
rated from his wife, and interdicts him from henceforth
haunting or frequenting the complainant ; but allows her to
receive him into her own habitation.

The Court of Assizes of the Eure-et-Loire, held at Ev-
reux, was engaged, on Friday and Saturday last, with the
trial of two men, Langlois and Godefroi, for an attempt to
murder the father of the former, under the following circum-
stances :—Langlois, the prisoner, having expectations of a
considerable inheritance on the death of his father, was eager
to enter into possession. He first attempted to poison his
sire, by sending him an omelette drugged with arsenic when
at work in the fields. This, however, failed, producing only
a violent sickness. Upon this he seduced a shepherd, the
other prisoner Godefroi, a man aged only 23, but married
and having a family, and being in the greatest distress to
become the murderer of the elder Langlois, by shooting him.
To insure his success, Langlois made him practise by firing
at rabbits, fowls, and other objects. When thought to be a
sufficient marksman, he was put on the watch for an oppor-
tunity of shooting the parent of his suborner. Finding, in
October last, the old man, who is 72 years of age, in his or-
chard gathering apples, Godefroi fired at him and struck
him. He then hastened back to the house of the son, and,
not finding him at home, left word for him with the servant
that he had hit the rabbit, but it was not yet dead. Langlois,
on receiving this intelligence, went to his father, feigning
great grief ; but, finding his father had only his arm broken,
he determined again to have recourse to arsenic, and sent
Godefroi to a chemist's to purchase some, but fortunately it
was refused him. Langlois, the son, lived in concubinage
with his female servant, who was with child by him. She
was acquainted with his horrible projects, and frequently re-
monstrated against them, upon which he quarrelled with her
and ill-treated her. At length she communicated these
facts to her brother and his wife. They, on hearing of the
attempt against Langlois, senior, went and related the whole
/toners:. tou the chief magistrate of Guillefontaine, in the Seine
for that lene re, where all the parties lived, and the nefarious act
guilt of th
was Perpetrated. Langlois, the son, and Godefroi, were ar-
rested,
confessed in due time brought before the Court of Assizes
department. Notwithstanding the evidence of the
of guilty,
in favour of both t
j)srisoners was incontrovertible, and Godefroi folly
I,ooof. as his in it, and declaring that he was to receive
found
drevrard, the jury in delivering their verdict
some flaw
which subjected both'
that there were extenuating circumstances
delinquents. The Procureur-General,
of hard iabour at the
discovering
in the form of delivering this verdict,
pealed against it to the
erCo
the convicts to the minor punishment
hulks for life, instead of death, ap-
pealed of Cassation, which quashed
Assizes for the Eure.
the judgment, and
the case were again given in
At this
new trial before the Court of
his confession. The prisoneevritee
Is new hearing all the facts of
to have been so avaricious as to have and Godefroi renewed
glois was further proved
forgery for the purpose of obtaining
sot
fra..oney. Holding a farm
committed robbery and
under his father at a rent of 1
day before the old man's life was attempted,
he had, on the
written his
then actually
name to a receipt of 900 f., two quarters
order thereby to save nine-tenths of the money he
was to pay to Godefroi for the bloody deed,
• were not concluded till twelve at night
due, in
logs The proceed-
on Satur
when the jury retired, and remained upwards of an hoarday,
deliberation. On their return they found Langlois in
parricide, and Godefroi of murder, with extenuatinggcir guilty
°f
stances as to the latter alone. Langlois was condemneedm.t;
death, and Godefroi, as before, to bard labour at the hulks
for life.