The National Intelligencer And Washington Advertiser

Raleigh, (N. C.) June 25.

On Wednesday last before the circuit court held for this district, came on to be tried the suit brought by the Earl of Coventry and others, the representatives of the late Earl Grenville, against Messrs. Collins and Allen of Edenton—the jury being sworn, the plaintiff's counsel stated their title as follows:—

That in 1664 the province of Carolina, was granted by king Charles II. to eight Lords Proprietors, of whom Lord Carteret afterwards created Earl Grenville was one—that in 1729 seven of the Lords Proprietors surrendered their parts of the province to the crown---that in 1744 the crown and earl Grenville divided the province, and one eighth part was allotted and set apart for earl Grenville—that in 1763 earl Grenville died, leaving Robert his son and heir at law, who took the title and estates—that in February, 1776. Robert earl Grenville died, and by his will devised his estate to trustees in trust for lord Carteret and others—that in 1795. lord Weymouth one of the trustees, died: the demise was laid, 1st, on the title of the surviving trustee; and 2dly. on the title of lord Carteret; to prove the descent of Robt. earl Grenville the deposition of Jno. Parkinson was read, and to prove the conveyances between the crown and the lords proprietors, and earl Grenville and the Crown, the original deeds were produced and read—. here the plaintiff's counsel rested their case.

The defendants' counsel then stated their defence to be,

1st. That the rights of the plaintiffs were lost by the change of government which took place on the dissolution of the royal government; that they thereby became aliens incapable of holding land, and that this incapacity still exists.
2d. That by the declaration of rights and the constitution of the state, the rights which the plaintiffs had before the revolution became vested in the collective body of the people of North Carolina.
3d. That their rights were taken away by some of the acts of Assembly for confiscating lands, and for opening offices for the entry of vacant and unappropriated lands.
4th. That the defendants had been in actual possession of the land since the year 1787, under a grant from the state, without any adverse claim set up till the suit brought by the plaintiffs.

To prove the latter, the grant was read and a statement of facts tending to prove the possession. The plaintiffs counsel then tendered a demurrer to the evidence, and upon the plaintiff.' admitting distinctly on the record that the defendants had been in the actual possession of the land from 1787, the defendants counsel joined in demurrer; whereupon the court discharged the jury from the further consideration of the cause. The argument of the demurrer was postponed by the court till December term.

The counsel for gen. Davie pressed for the trial of the suit brought against him but the court directed it to be continued on the ground, that it was unnecessary to try that till the demurrer should be argued and disposed of.

Thus the truly important question how far the rights of earl Grenville have been affected by the change of government, the laws of confiscation and the acts of limitation, is submitted to the decision of an able and enlightened court. We do not pretend to be acquainted with the legal principles on which the event of this question depends, but we flatter ourselves that the result will be favorable to the interests of the state. The importance of this controversy must be obvious to every reflecting mind: and we trust that as the Legislature will be in session before the argument will be heard, that they will yet lend their assistance to those who are defending her great rights and best interests.

We forbear to repeat any of the arguments which were used by counsel in discussing the propriety of joining in the demurrer to the evidence tendered by the counsel for the plaintiffs, because they had no bearing on the main question.

We shall however use our best endeavours to furnish to the public a full and accurate statement of the arguments which may be cited at the next term on the demurrer.