Lordship was received in that town with all the honours and enthusiasm of a triumphal entrance; the town poured forth its population to gratulate him; a cavalcade, comprising the principal personages in the county, escorted his Lordship into the town, and he afterwards dined at the Town-hall. A short time after, the freedom of the borough was presented to his Lordship in a gold box, and the freedom of the Dra pers' Company. Besides these testimonies of affection from the people of Shrewsbury, a sword was presented to his Lordship by the corporation of London; another by the inhabitants of Birmingham; and his Lordship was also entertained with public dinners, and public rejoicings, by the corporation and citizens at Chester; by the inhabitants of Whitchurch, Drayton, Ellesmere, &c. His Lordship now hoped to pass the remainder of his days upon his estate and among his friends; but he was immediately appointed to take command of an expedition against the Americans. Happily, however, the negotiations with that Power terminated with the signature of peace; and on the return of Bonaparte from Elba, on the 4th of March, 1815, and his re-ascendancy in France, Lord Hill was offered a command in the Netherlands, and was present at the ever-memorable battle of Waterloo. His Lordship, on that occasion, had a horse shot under him; and his two brothers were wounded. The following victories are enumerated on Lord Hill's monumental column, erected near the town of Shrewsbury:-Roleia, Vimiera, Corunna, Douro, Talavera, Busaco, Arroyo de Molino, Almarez, Vittoria, Pyrenees, Nivelle, Nive, Hillette, Orthez, Aire, Tarbes, Toulouse, and Waterloo. There was not one of these memorable achievements, to the glorious consummation of which his daring intrepidity, or imperturbable coolness, promptitude, and presence of mind, did not materially contribute. Perhaps the one in which he most distinguished himself, and the success of which is almost exclusively attributable to him, was the desperate fight of Almarez, in 1812, March 16th, from which he took his second title. At Waterloo for some time the corps of Lord Hill took no prominent part in the engagement. The post of his Lordship during the severe combats at Hougumont, La Haye Sainte, and on the centre of the position, was on the slope of the heights

of Merke Braine, to the right of the Nivelle road, covering the right wing of the general line. From this position he anxiously observed every movement of the enemy; and, as Napoleon gradually concentrated his left in the impetuous attacks upon Hougumont, his Lordship carefully opposed him, until the whole of his command was formed in squares on the heights which overlooked that important position between the roads of Nivelle and Gemappe. From this moment to the triumphant close of the battle, he directed their operations in person. In the great crisis of this conflict, when Napoleon made his last effort, and the Imperial Guard advanced to the attack, the services of Lord Hill, and especially of that brigade of his Lordship's corps commanded by Lieut.-General Adam, were conspicuous; and by the judgment and ardour with which he supported the British Guards, he largely contributed to the final and glorious result. After the restoration of the Bourbon family to the throne of France, his Lordship was appointed second in command of the army of occupation in that country, where he remained till the evacuation of the country by the allied armies. In the year 1828, his Lordship was appointed the General Commanding in Chief of the army, which post he continued to fill under several ministries. The following honourable testimony by a political opponent, was given in the House of Commons on the 22nd of May, 1835. Sir Rufane Donkin said-"He felt bound as a soldier to bear his testimony to the honest and impartial manner in which Lord Hill had distributed the patronage of the army. He believed that never for one moment since that noble Lord had taken office, had he given way to private feeling or political bias in his distribution of the army patronage at his disposal." Though we believe Lord Hill, as a commander, never suffered a defeat, yet no heedless sacrifice of life ever purchased for him the field of victory. The laurels he bravely won, were solely attributable to his generalship and extraordinary skill in directing the energies of his troops under his command. "With Hill," it was usually observed by the soldiery, "both life and victory may be ours." "The Soldier's Friend" was his acknowledged title. On resigning the office of Commander-in-Chief a few months before his decease, Lord Hill was created

a Viscount, which title descended at his death to his nephew Sir Rowland Hill of Hawkstone, Bart., previously one of the Members of Parliament for Shropshire.

13. At Maghera, co. Derry, Dr. M'Cullagh, late 84th Regiment. His death was accidentally caused by a friend, who was in the act of uncorking a bottle of soda water; the cork flew out, and struck Dr. M'Cullagh on the jugular vein, who fell down and instantly expired.

At Castle Hill, Ealing, General Sir Frederick Wetherall, G.C.H., in his 88th year.

At Easington Rectory, Yorkshire, the Rev. Robert Morehead, D.D., formerly Rector of Easington.

14. At Marlborough Buildings, Bath, the Baron Browne Mill.

15. At the Haining, Selkirkshire, R. Pringle, esq., of Clifton and Haining. 16. Aged 48, Lieut.-Col. George Douglas Standen, late of the Scots Fusileer Guards.

In Eaton-place, the Countess of Denbigh, in her 44th year.

At the Citadel, Hawkstone, Elizabeth Rhodes, Relict of the late John Hill, esq., of Hawkstone, and mother of the present Viscount Hill, in her 65th year.

17. The Rev. Robert Grosvenor, Fellow of All Souls' College Oxford, brother to General Grosvenor.

At Colonel Wyndham's House in Grosvenor-place, Francis Scowan Blunt, esq., of Crabbett in Sussex, in his 52nd year.

18. At his house, Potsford Hill, near Guildford, occasioned by a fall from his horse, James Magnay, esq., third son of the late Christopher Magnay, esq., of East Hill, Wandsworth, one of the Aldermen of the City of London, in his

45th year.

19. At Chavenage, near Tetbury, aged 78 John Delafield Phelps, esq., F.R.S. F.S.A. He was of Oriel College, Oxford, B.A., 1785. Mr. Phelps was a well-known collector of books and antiquities, particularly such as related to his native county, Gloucestershire, and has left a very valuable library. He was one of the original members of the Roxburghe Club.

20. At Boughton, Malherbe, the Rev. Simeon Clayton, Rector of that parish, and Prebendary of Lichfield, in his 48th year.

21. At Huntercombe, near Maidenhead, aged 85, the Right Hon. Elizabeth, Countess of Carysfort, sister of the late Lord Grenville.

At Sidmouth, Col. John Gray, late of the Royal Scots Greys.

22. At his residence, Grove-road, St. John's Wood, aged 86, Admiral Sir John Lawford, K.C.B. This much-respected old officer had been a commissioned officer in the Navy for sixty-five years, and served as First Lieutenant of the Nimrod, 98 guns, in the battle of the 12th April, 1782, that ship being Lord Rodney's second astern on that day.

23. At Bangor, aged 66, Lovell Edgeworth, esq., of Edgeworth Town, Ireland.

24. At Leamington, Lord Gillies, in his 80th year. He was admitted a member of the Faculty of Advocates in 1787; and after attaining the highest eminence in his profession, he was, in 1811, elevated to the Bench. As a judge, he was distinguished alike for his powerful grasp of intellect, and his profound knowledge of law. His judg ments generally commanded the most unlimited confidence. His Lordship mixed little in the political world, though in the earlier part of his career he was a decided Whig. Latterly, however, his views on these subjects underwent a great change.

26. At Weymouth, Richard Silver Gascoigne, esq., only surviving son of Richard Oliver Gascoigne, esq., of Parlington, Yorkshire.

27. At the residence of his son-inlaw, the Rev. R. H. Fowler, Vicarage, Southwell, Notts., Thomas Bish, esq., formerly of Cornhill, in his 63rd year.

At his residence in Chester, Francis Wrangham, M.A., late Archdeacon of the East Riding of York, Chaplain to the Archbishop of York, Canon of York and Chester, Rector of Hunmanby, Yorkshire, and of Doddleston, Cheshire, in his 74th year.

At his seat, Studley Priory, Oxfordshire, Sir Alexander Croke, in his 84th year.

30. Major-Gen. Sir Charles Deacon, K.C.B., of Great Berkhampstead. He entered the military service of the East India Company, in the Madras Presidency, in 1793; was made a Captain in 1803; a Colonel in 1829; and attained the rank of a Major-General in 1837.

COURT OF COMMON

PLEAS.

January, 20.

SITTINGS IN BANCO-EVANS v. PRATT-BETTING ON A STEE PLE-CHASE.

This was an action upon an agreement to run the plaintiff's mare, Matilda, against a brown mare belonging to the defendant, four miles across country, play or pay, each carrying thirteen stone; and the agreement provided that, if the brown mare won, the plaintiff should pay 251. to the defendant, while, in the event of Matilda's winning the race, the defendant was to pay the plaintiff 100l. The brown mare came in at the winning-post about fifty or sixty yards in advance of Matilda, but Mr. Holyoake, who acted as umpire, gave his decision in favour of Matilda, upon the ground that the defendant had ridden the brown mare through an open gate, contrary to the regulations which, in compliance with the admitted laws of steeple-chasing, he had drawn up for the guidance of the jockies, The trial took place before Mr. Justice Coltman at the last Shrewsbury assizes. The verdict passed for the plaintiff, and on the first day of last Michaelmas term a rule nisi was obtained to arrest the judgment, upon the ground that a steeple-chase was illegal, and

not within the protection of the statutes which regulate horse-racing.

Mr. Serjeant Talfourd showed cause, and Mr. Serjeant Ludlow appeared in support of the rule. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel the following judgment was delivered by Lord Chief Justice Tindal. "The difficulty which is thrown into this case by the argument on the part of the defendant, is the conclusion at which it would compel us to arrive; for if my brother Ludlow is right, then, as the law now stands, no race would be legal, because the 13th George 2nd, having only licensed the running of races at Black Hambleton and Newmarket-heath, and that sta tute having been repealed by the act 3 & 4 Vic., c. 5, unless the statute 18 George 2nd renders horse-races legal, all horse-races are illegal under the statute 9 Anne, c. 14. Now, it would be a most singular thing, if the act 3 & 4 Vic. had the effect attributed to it, when we cannot but see that the object and intention of that statute was to encourage horseracing, by preventing common informers from suing for penalties, rather than to increase the restrictions which the law had already laid upon it. I cannot help thinking, therefore, that the law on this subject now stands upon the just construction of the statute 18

George 2nd, c. 34, and, looking at the 11th section of that statute, I see no objection to the match set out upon the present record being considered to be a legal race within the meaning of that clause." The Learned Judge then read the 11th section. "These words appear to me, taking the whole clause together, to include any other place or places, over and besides Black Hambleton and Newmarket-heath. I cannot but think, that if the whole intent of that section had been to relieve persons from penalties for racing with other weights than those permitted by the act of the 13th of George 2nd, c. 19, the words, at any place or places whatsoever' would not have been found in this clause. Besides, we must recollect that this act was passed to take away penalties, and an act which is to relieve the subject from penalties must have a liberal exposition. But the argument for the defendant is, that the words 'place or places' must mean places where races are usually run. Certainly Lord Eldon, whose authority no man could be more ready to bow to than myself, seems, in 'Whaley v. Pajot,' to have leaned to the conclusion, that a horse-race is not legal unless it be run upon the turf; but the case itself was ultimately decided, and was certainly capable of being decided, upon other grounds. There the agreement was, that a single horse should run from point A to point B, against two horses performing the same distance between them, and that could hardly be said to be a race between two horses starting from the same point and going to a given point, in order to deter mine which of the two was the best. That, therefore, might well be understood not to be a horse

race within the meaning of the statute. But on the present record the starting-point is the same, and the place at which the horses are to arrive is the same, and the case, therefore, steers clear of the difficulty presented by Whaley v. Pajot.' Upon the whole, it seems to me that this was a race within the meaning of the statute 13 George 2nd, because it was a trial of the speed, strength, and vigour of the horses engaged in it, just as much as if it had been run upon a level course, and perhaps even more so. If we were to say that no race was legal unless it were run upon a course free from impediment, it would be impossible for a horse even to take a leap at starting. I think, therefore, that this objection is not made out, and that the plaintiff is entitled to his judgment." The other members of the court concurred, and the rule was discharged.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER. January 29.

SITTINGS IN BANCO-JERVISON v. DYSON.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff nominally for money had and received by the defendant to his use, but in effect to try a most important question. The plaintiff claimed to exercise the office of coroner within the liberty of the honour of Pontefract, in the West Riding of York, to which he had been appointed by the Crown, by virtue of the Duchy of Lancaster, the rights, privileges, and emoluments of which title, as is well known, have become merged in the kingly office. Under this appointment, the plaintiff claimed to have the exclusive right of

holding inquests super visum corporis within the honour, and the defendant, on the other hand, as the county coroner, asserted his right to, at least, a concurrent jurisdiction with that of the plaintiff, if not an exclusive one, he being elected by the freeholders of the West Riding to the office of county coroner. At the trial before Lord Denman, at the last assizes at York, a great mass of evidence was gone into on both sides, when it appeared that the plaintiff chiefly rested his claim upon an ancient charter by Edward 3rd, granted in the year 1349, to the then Earl of Lancaster, by which the possessions of the duchy were conferred upon that nobleman. By this instrument, as was contended then and now, the Crown granted the right to appoint a coroner, to the exclusion of all others, within the Duchy. The plaintiff also proved the appointment of coroners under this charter in the reign of Elizabeth, though it did not appear that any instance was adduced of the exercise of the duties of that office till within the last seventy years, while the defendant proved a regular and unbroken exercise of those duties on the part of his predecessors, from time immemorial. Besides the original charter, however, the plaintiff put in two others, granted by Richard 2nd, (after the banishment of the Duke of Hereford, better known Henry 4th) to the Dukes of Surrey and Albemarle, on the occasion of his taking possession of all John Gaunt's property, which he did immediately on his death. These charters purported to grant to these noblemen portions of the duchy, and by them it was expressly stated, that the right to

as

appoint coronors had been given by the original charter of Edward 3rd. The verdict having passed for the plaintiff at the trial, a rule nisi was afterwards granted to the defendant for a new trial, the question to be discussed therein being, whether the words of the charter included such a grant as was contended for by the plaintiff, the court being of opinion with Lord Denman that if they did, it was an exclusive one. This rule came on for argument, when the recently appointed judge, Mr. Cresswell, appeared for the last time at the bar, and argued for the plaintiff, that though there was no express mention of coroner in the charter, yet that, upon investigation thereof and comparison with others, it would be abundantly clear, that that officer was included in the passages of the charter upon which the plaintiff rested his case. One of the duties of the coroner was to attach the pleas of the Crown, and though the word coronator did not occur in the grant, yet as the grant was of attachiamenta de placitis Corona, it would follow that the Crown meant to empower the grantee to appoint that officer exclusively within the duchy. The particular clause upon which the case turned was as follows:-"Et etiam quod idem comes habeat retorna omnium brevium nostrorum et hæredum nostrorum, et summonitionum de scaccario nostro et hæredum nostrorum, et attachiamenta, tam de placitis Coronæ quam de aliis quibuscunque, in omnibus terris et feodis suis : ita quod nullus vicecomes vel alius ballivus seu minister noster vel hæredum nostrorum terras vel feoda illa ingrediatur ad executiones quorundam brevium et summonitionum, seu ad atta