Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

tion of the effects of freemen who die intestate, and in case the custom of the city of London, as to the distribution of personal estate, applies to such a freeman as sir Francis Drake was then.

Secondly, Whether there is any custom of the city of London, by virtue whereof the widow of a freeman, having the benefit and provision of such settlement as the settlement in the pleadings in this case, is debarred from the customary share of his personal estate. Those questions were first proposed to the recorder of the city of London, but were submitted at his suggestion to the court of aldermen for their certificate.

Mr. Shadwell, as counsel for Mr. Sergeant Onslow, contended, that sir Francis Drake had been a freeman of the city of London in the most complete sense of the word, and had been entitled to all the privileges of one of that body. The conferring of the freedom of the city upon meritorious individuals, comprehended, of course, all the advantages to which persons who obtained the freedom in any other way were entitled, otherwise it would be a mere mockery to propose such a mode of conveying the sense the corporation enter tained of the great efforts of the naval and military heroes of the country. Mr. Shadwell cited some authorities in support of his position. After which,

Mr. Spankie addressed the Court for the other claimant to the property. He argued, that the freedom of the city, conferred, as it had been, upon sir Francis Drake, was not burdened with the inconveniencies which necessarily at tended those who became freemen under different circumstances; and that it never could have been meant

to impose upon a man, upon whom the freedom had been bestowed as a mark of honour, and testimony of great merit, the performance of duties incompatible with his situation. If an equal portion of the duties were expected to be taken by the first of the nobility of the land, to whom the freedom of the city had been voted, there would be but few who would consent to the honour. Besides, what condition was the liability of honorary freemen likely to place them in? The custom of the city of London took away from parents the right to leave their children under the guardianship of those whom they might approve, and placed them under the control of whom? why, of the chamberlain of London. That regulation might be a wise one, so far as related to the orphans of those who were freemen by purchase, servitude, or birth: but how must the duke of Wellington be surprised at being told that one of the rewards to which his military exertions entitled him was, that his daughters must, at his death, be placed under the care of the chamberlain of the city of London, and that all attempts to interfere with that regulation would be vain? But the chamberlain was to have a still greater authority over those who happened to meet with the approbation of the lord mayor and common council of the city, if the question were decided in favour of the argument of his learned friend. The duke of Wellington in that case must resign his authority, with regard to the marriage of his daughters, into the hands of the chamberlain, who, in the event of his grace's death, could exercise paternal authority over them, until the age of maturity recognised by the law.

Mr. Shadwell replied. He contended that a person could not become a member of a society with out submitting to its obligations; some rules might be beneficial, and others not; but the freeman, if benefitted by some, must run his chance of the inconveniences attending the other regulations. What he understood by honorary freedom was, the possession of the privileges without being subject to the burdens, which might be incompatible with the situation of the person on whom the honour was conferred.

The Court, when the arguments were concluded, submitted the questions to the city law officers.

[ocr errors]

22. LIBEL. JURY COURT, EDINBURGH.-Dr. J. Hamilton, Jun. v. Dr. Hope. The Court met on Monday, to try an action of damages at the instance of Dr. Hamilton, professor of Midwifery in the University of Edinburgh, against Dr. Hope, professor of Chemistry in the same University, for defamation. The damages were laid at 5,000l.

The substance of the first issue was, whether, in the month of April 1825, at a meeting of the Senatus of the University, in the presence and hearing of the professors, the defender did impute intended falsehood to the pursuer.

The substance of the second and third issues was, whether a memorial and petition, presented by the pursuer to the magistrates of Edinburgh, the patrons of the University, in January, 1824, craving that the graduates of the college of Edinburgh should be required to learn the treatment of the diseases of women and children, and that the professor of midwifery should be admitted a member of the medical faculty, and exercise

all the powers and privileges with regard to graduation, which other members of the faculty possess, contained the following words, or words to the following effect, viz. :

[ocr errors]

"While the memorialist (pursuer) can prove that the present professor of chemistry does not teach the processes of pharmacy, nor the making of chemical preparations for the apothecaries' shops, he is ready to bear testimony, in common with the public at large, to the great value of Dr. Hope's services as a professor in the college of Edinburgh, and to express his conviction that his admirable and scientific course must be of the highest interest to every physician. It is well known that this has never been attempted, and that the professor of the practice of physic for the last half century has confined himself to a description of the diseases most commonly met with, such as fever, general inflammatory affections, &c.; at any rate, the memorialist positively asserts, that, within his recollection, the professor of the practice of physic has not entered into any details respecting the diseases of women and children, and for the plain reason, that the other subjects of his lecture filled up all the time of his course. That he (the pursuer) was induced to make this improvement on the plan of his predecessors, because he found that neither the professor of the practice of physic, nor any of the other professors constituting the medical faculty, treated of such diseases. If the honourable patrons feel any difficulty in assenting to this latter proposition, they are referred to the bills of mortality of London. Thus, in the year 1820 (the last account to which the memorialist has had access), of 19,348 deaths

of

during that year, 8,350 were under ten years of age, and of that number 725 were still-born. Of the remainder, viz. 7,625, 3,577 are alleged to have died of convulsions and teething. Hence it must be evident, that nearly one-half of the children under ten years of age, who died in the year 1820, in London, were afflicted with diseases, on which no information is given to the medical students of Edinburgh, by those professors who style themselves the medical faculty. Be the reasons of the medical faculty what they may, the members of the faculty cannot deny that the diseases of women and children form a necessary part of the education every medical man. It is, moreover, impossible for them to allege, that any one of their number does teach those subjects, and it would not be a little extraordinary, if, after their former attempt, they should pretend to be unwilling to burden the students with an additional expense. No man can now practise physic with safety to the public, without a knowledge of the diseases of women and children, and none of the members of the medical faculty, as at present constituted, do teach that knowledge." And whether the whole or any part of the above averments were known to the pursuer to be false at the time he presented the memorial to the magistrates.

Mr. H. Cockburn opened the case for the pursuer in a speech of great length, in which he strongly pointed out to the jury the deep injury likely to be sustained by his client from having been stigmatized by the defender at a meeting of the Senatus of the University of Edinburgh as an utterer of wilful falsehood, an assertion made in the absence of the pursuer; no expres

sion of regret had been made by the defender for the imputation, who, on the contrary, now stood up before a jury of his country, and justified the expressions he had made, with the view of extinguishing the pursuer, and rendering him infamous for ever. In conclusion, he observed, that the question for the jury was not as to the amount of damages, but that by their verdict they should mark their disapprobation of the conduct of the defender.

A number of witnesses were then examined by the pursuer, among whom were professors Bell, Napier, sir W. Hamilton, bart., Coventry, and Russell, who successively proved that the expression imputed to the defender was uttered by him at the time and place set forth in the issues; the abovementioned gentlemen also gave it as their opinion, that the facts stated in the pursuer's memorial to the patrons of the University, did not call for the epithets that had been applied to him. Wm. Wood, surgeon, who had examined the MSS. of the memorial, and marked some alterations, also expressed a similar opinion.

Mr.

The Solicitor General opened the case for the defender. He stated that his client could not have been actuated by malice, but was repelling an injurious attack made on his character by the pursuer, in a memorial to the patrons of the University, of which he admitted having printed 200 copies, and that its circulation was not confined to the patrons and professors of the University.

Principal Baird, professor Dunbar, Dr. Alison, Dr. Fyfe, Dr. Anderson, rev. Dr. William Ritchie, Dr. Home, Dr. Mackintosh, Dr.

Cullen, and Mr. Dickson, were then called for the defender, whose evidence went to prove that Dr. Hope exhibited the different processes of chemical pharmacy in his class, according to the three different Pharmacopoeias of Edinburgh, London, and Dublin, taking that of Edinburgh for his text-book, and that part of his course formed a most important branch of medical study. Several of the witnesses also proved that the late Dr. Gregory and Dr. Home treated of the most important of the diseases incidental to women and children, the negative of which had been asserted by the pursuer in his memorial; one of the witnesses (Dr. Mackintosh), who had attended Dr. Hamilton's class for three courses, and was not sure but he had at tended a fourth course, said he had received more information from Dr. Gregory on the subject of those diseases than he had from Dr. Hamilton. Mr. Jeffrey replied for the pursuer.

The lord chief commissioner having summed up the evidence, the jury, after an hour's consulta tion, returned a verdict for the pursuer-Damages 500l.

23. WESTMINSTER ABBEY.The return of the Dean and Chapter, to the order of the House of Commons, dated 16th of March, 1826, for an account of the sums charged for the admission of each visitor to view the public monuments in that Abbey, the total amount received from that source in each year, for the last five years, and how the same has been appropriated.

"The Dean and Chapter of Westminster are unable to make the precise return described in the order of your honourable House. The order requires an account of

[ocr errors]

the sums charged for admission to view the Public Monuments' in the Abbey. But no charge has ever been made for viewing the Public Monuments,' as distinguished from the private ones. The whole are viewed together for a fixed sum; and by far the greatest part of the monuments are those of private persons; for viewing which, the greatest part of the charge is incurred. The Dean and Chapter, however, having not the smallest wish that any part of the subject should be concealed, will furnish such information as they possess concerning it, though beyond the terms of the order of your honourable House."

"1st. As to the sums charged for the admission of each visitor to view the monuments, private as well as public, for the last five years:

"Before his majesty's coronation, in 1821, the whole sum permitted to be charged, was 1s. 11d. But the guides had obtained additional gratuities from the visitors, and complaints were made against these exactions. When the church was re-opened, after his majesty's coronation, a new order was therefore made, and the utmost sum to be received was 2s. all compensation to the guides being included in this sum.

"This regulation, under which less was paid by the public than before, was continued till June, 1825, when the sum was lowered to 1s. 3d.

"2nd. The total amount received from the above source in each year, for the last five years:

1821

£. s. d. 648 11 11

2,317 9 3

[blocks in formation]

1,664 13 9

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

"3rd. How the same has been by the benevolence of the crown. appropriated:

"All the above sums have been received by the minor canons, and the gentlemen of the choir; and divided among themselves, after portions allowed to the officers of the choir; the Dean and Chapter neither interfering, nor knowing when the division was made.

"This grant was made to the choir in the year 1697, on the condition that, receiving the bene fits from the exhibition of the monuments, they should keep the monuments always clean. This, however, had not been done; and when the Dean and Chapter wished, after his majesty's coronation, to give to the Abbey as much beauty as possible, they cleaned all the monuments at their own private expense, with the sole exception of the royal monuments, which were subsequently repaired and cleaned, without any agency of the Dean and Chapter, who only knew the amount of the charge for that work from the list of contingencies lately submitted to parliament.

"The Dean and Chapter have made the above statement, in order to meet the wishes of your honour able House. They will now beg leave to say a few words on behalf of themselves.

[ocr errors][merged small]

In this charter, queen Elizabeth has, of her free bounty, conferred the church on the Dean and Chapter for ever, and has subjected it to their sole and lawful manage ment.

“ And further, their founder has not only empowered, but required them to defend the privileges and immunities which she has thus bestowed upon them, against all aggression or encroachment. "By order of the Dean and Chap

ter, GEORGE GILES VINCENT, Chapter-Clerk."

24. MAUNDY THURSDAY.-At the King's-chapel Royal, St. James's Palace, about one hundred of the juvenile branches of the nobility and gentry were confirmed by the bishop of London, as dean of this chapel, assisted by the sub-dean, and the rev. Mr. Oakley, his lordship's chaplain.

At his majesty's chapel, Whitehall, the usual annual royal donations were distributed to as many poor men and women as the king is years old, viz. 64 of each.

A temporary building had been constructed at the back of Whitehall chapel for the occasion, which was divided into two compartments, the larger for the reception of the Maundy men and women. At the ends, seats were prepared for the accommodation of the visitors, who were admitted by tickets; the smaller room was fitted up with shelves, as a store larder, on which were arranged the salt fish, loaves of bread, &c. to be distributed.

About eleven o'clock the Maundy people arrived, and were arranged by the attendants, the men at one table, and the women at the other.

Morning Service.-The Maundy people being seated, Mr. Hanby,

« EdellinenJatka »