192 ANNUAL REGISTER, 1817. 



The Master of the Rolls said, he 

 should hesitate along while before 

 he determined that an owner of 

 real property, by merely agreeing 

 to grant a lease, became bound to 

 shew a title to the estate out of 

 which it was to be granted : but 

 it was quite a different question, 

 whether he who was unable, or 

 thought it inexpedient, to show 

 his titles to the property to be 

 leased, should have a right to com- 

 pel a defendant to take a lease of 

 such property, without any other 

 security for enjoyment than the 

 covenants into which the lessor 

 commonly entered. What the 

 defendant had contracted for was 

 not a piece of parchment, or a 

 precarious enjoyment from one 

 year to another, but an absolute 

 enjoyment for "21 )ears, the value 

 of which depended upon the cer- 

 tainty of its duration. Of this 

 certainty of duration he could not 

 be satisfied without examining the 

 title of the Skinnei's' Company ; 

 and as tlie plaintiff was unwilling 

 to trust the inspection of it to 

 those who might jjrobably dis- 

 cover soiue defect in it, the de- 

 fendant was well justified in 

 refusing to accept the lease. His 

 Honour accordingly decreed, that 

 the Master's judgment was erro- 

 neous, in having reported that a 

 good title to the lease could be 

 made, and that consequently the 

 exception must be allowed. 



^ON-ATTENDANCE AT UIVINE 

 WORSJir. 



Bedfordshii'e Lent Assizes. 



The Rev. Edward Drake Free, 

 Clerk, v. Sir Montague Roger Bitr- 

 ^oine. — This was an action of a 

 very novel as well as of a very ex- 



traordinary description, and ex- 

 cited a considerable degree of in- 

 terest throughout the county. Dr. 

 Free, who is Rector of Sutton, ap- 

 peared in Court, (h'essed in his 

 canonicals, and was prepared to 

 take part in the conduct of his 

 own cause. The Court through- 

 out was crowded almost to suffo- 

 cation. The jury, which was 

 common, liaving been sworn. 



Dr. Free addressed the learned 

 Judge on the Bench. He ob- 

 served, that he had been driven 

 into Court on the present occa- 

 sion, in conscfiuence of a motion 

 made by the learned Counsel on 

 the other side for judgment, in 

 consequence of his not having 

 proceeded to trial at the last as- 

 sizes : aided by the remarkable 

 fondness of the attorney on the 

 same side for money. It was not 

 his intention to have taken any 

 farther stejis in this business, be- 

 cause he had observed with satis- 

 faction that Sir Montague had be- 

 gun to return to reason, by coming 

 to church on the 7 th of April last. 

 The steps taken by the defendant's 

 legal advisers, however, had com- 

 pelled him to come forward : and 

 in doing so, he felt he was vindi- 

 cating the cause, not alone of his 

 brother clergymen, who had been 

 but too frequently maligned, but 

 of the Church of England itself. 

 He trusted the example which 

 would be made of the defendant 

 would operate as a warning to 

 others, and prevent that inexcus- 

 able inattention to divine worship 

 which, when occurring with a 

 person of influence in the county, 

 had the worst effects upon the 

 habits and manners of the lower 

 orders of society. Having made 

 this short preface, he should leave 



his 



