The Sun. — London, England, 1846-11-04 00:00:00

St, J ohn ' hlm:, New Brun sw i ck. Sid. ...Nova Scotia, Kyerson, Te. , New Brunswick. j osrowy, C CT . 31.--Arrd ' t in's, New BrUNSwiek Lo - T ' ' r, Rh, Nov. 1.--Wied S.S.W. strong.—Arrd. Echo, Keiff, -ti_vatittali, for Leith ; Pandora,'White, Quebec. eEtvasT, Nov. 2.—Wind S.S.W., fresh.—Atrd. Orion, Itattford, Prince Edward's Island ; Planter, Quebec. _ F 134 ' 1 1-1, SEPT. 21.—The Portuguese schooner Cacador, from 4 .Yal to this port, was wrecked on the coast near Suba 0 5 the 15th instant ; cargo expected to be saved. the 15 Nov. 3.—The- Lord John Russell and Ann, both 11,Yk_ fasted and abandoned, were passed iu lon. 26 by the , Seroggins, arrived here. ob., altr3totrrit, Nov. 2.-11 e Louisa, waterlogged . and 4 9;\;, l lan d was Passed on I t the 25th of September in la t. 1,; .' lo n. 36 W., by the Nation, Bevan, arrived at Leghorn. f Etrasr, Nov. 2.—The Aldebaran Barris, of Newcastle, ilin Liverpool to Quebec, has put back to this port, from Wre c t i 3 ' l !aky; on the 23d ult. she passed through much . . 0 , anu saw many dismasted vessels. i'1,...4wel acted brig, of about 250 tons, supposed to belong to il at4..astle or Sunderland, was passed on the 15th ult i , t.i in h t, llol l. 34, distalqed and abandoned; and on the 9 I , fo tin - d ; 49 , lon. 25, a coppered schooner, from Lisbon to New the ntantl, painted red inside, lying to, but could not hear name' was 3p2...____ken by the Orion, Rawford• M ARK- -- yr ---- 7 --- -- -- --- - ----------- (THIS DAY' !. Biitannia, Cockle, St Coit v - EXCHANGE —WEDNESDAY weSlince Monday the arrivals:of English Wheat, coastwise d as t ate ~I) 3 '' land carriage and sample, have been on . a mo s.v e e, i t „ ri ° . -a . e, yet the show of that grain to-day was extensive, last Thr,k"e!'l?aily consisting of the parcels left over . from l tlein4:ill,- . The attendance of buyers being smal , in valu e w a$ in aver y depressed state, and the late decline free forei gn ,; 1 ,; with difficulty- supported. The ithe quantityof at kit pi ,' .. l s l . eat on offer was good. Fine parcels were rc _ ased at flir , i l e 2 but all other qualities might have been. b boihin reduced carrencies. In bonded gra m pu next . to lat. g w as doing. The quantity of foreign Barley being ge, that article Was heavy, and tite rates were not _s a u t p s: ported. -Bean s, p_ 4l it moved off steadily at full pncep. 0 term s , ,:as, and Flour might have been purchased on easier . • • • • ........ ". Wh ARR IVALS. 2,, o -- • Barley. • 1 , 6 70 qrs. 2 ,828 2,220 Malt, 850 qrs. eWrirlltezza.pEZ. su pplies of rilat being still on the increase , to report a very Beef from dull trade, at dropping prices. 4d to 2483 :Id . to 3s 6d ; Mutton, 3s 6d to 4s 6d ; Veal, 3s we have and York, 38 4d to 4s 8d per gibs, by the carcase. Oats j Flour. 150 qrs. I 1,390.k5. 390 I -- 11,780 WV) $ rg -4 40‘ ir kr -AO vlr RANCEIT, ""`"----y. — _ ( THIS DAY.) 14 l'rfP staTrER OF FENDER.—JUDGMENT% T he L O . which ‘,. an eIIANCELLOR gave judgment in this case, the (L e i oi was heard yesterday upon an appeal from a soli e l, ° , ll , °f the Master of the Rolls , deciding that_ or ta x , ti `' . / s bill, though not signed, was a subt .1.. th e i 'IL Ris Lordship, after going at some length_i e n e t n o set s of be , the ease and the authorities that had . b D e tha-7 during the arguments, stated his opinion to soli cit° ~e true construction of the Act was, that all Of t , r ? . bills, whether signed or not, were the subject ~,,, t, tion. The judgnient of the Master of the 1:? ;.se ll_ ti t ), elloeltesfore correct, and the appeal must be dismi- d upon finleadi n bs yt the the Th ii VANDELEUR V. DLAGRAVE. . heari case came before the Court tthe eiTresritled by Mr. Blarvneg di against the statenslnts,i& a petition of re ), ( i v a l i *), la tahetyeeaßrllBl3B a A ßill wasdecree of (1,41. Vandeleur, for the purpose of setting a h 4d bof release of an annu;ty, which the plaintiff by the agent of kr, T,eeTil l'nproperly obtained from him les Cooksey plaintiff, e ed a ar _ -, a l'', ''''agrave by person named Ch ..'"• It '' a - in , ber 1827, ajar; 4rave . aPPeare4 that INovun 'desirous of borrowing 11110 resided-in Bri s tol, was vas entitled to eansitilje, sumo money. Mrs. Blagrave 1 Mrs. .i.s . t - aaNicau'e property, and among other certain estates in Perk,h): of 8001. a-year, secured upon who had been things to an lea ? t-'l4. Mr. Charles Cooksey Yates.,. introduced to Mrs. tlair-ar°owh to Major Vandeleur, was mil.° plaintiff the sum xve alci ~ and he informed her that the of' her itioot . 0 willing to advance Both Parties eer raittcd u3' way of annuity. son agreed to grav e the matter to Mr. Yates, and Mrs. Ba m; annuity of Noe: 4 h the approbation of h e er tir 14500 t 4 the plaintiff, Major Vandel 41 th,,?ear, in c onsideration of the by an assurance, t 4or '"" annuity was to be secured ady ' ance of 2,500/ 0 ., 4lte ,„"eted Unor the life of Mrs. Blagrave, That re- . rayil) • ' • tof the annul y. id to t the kiLaa g the premium ou . The 1 advanced by PlainPlaill4aounted to 520/., leaving 180/. to he In' " 1. as interest for the 2,500 . e'udg • r l b, ~ . liop,i'd'r the annuity v.' ofas to ei c a i t t e t t; a u a p n i n u i annuity theordinary him.d scrip. g(,tit. Ja)(luf annu it yduly entered upihaenlapso of some ,4,141,13' pZ;lartswoame years. Attvi', `ateS infoormed was desirous (4 r,,-,F received some large sumr For that purpose the plaintiff A n, it l e tia n t e A y l , rs. BlagFav u e s , Yatescar left r.itehasing the annuity. At n the repurchase. .and SZiraisr.isttol, and went to the estate of the plaintiff, t ~.I(''', in order to arrange the upon his asking Yates'tr:tt''',,,W which took place between r ')t• bavid Roche was present, and the money, the plaintiff }i ,i' whether he was prepared then to pay se ll out to -tlat,l that he was not, that he should be in a condition o f th u ,sq shortly, as airs. Blagrave ould th e 4 ! °11 ,(Is as soon as t him they rose a all :, .'44 that if he would leave the matter with little Yates assuring tiff Zdhl be right. U pon this understanding, the plain heroLica ,eled the deed of release, which Yates took with b ein ~0 tristol. Sonae time elapsed, and the money h n e ot orthcoming, Yates was written to, and mind L and th at ~ that Mrs. Blagrave had changed her min , t .„ Ilcii(i l ie s continue to pay the annuity, Yates . s ill vp trig "should deed of release. Ultimately it was diseo• 1-(1 that Yates had been naisleading Mrs. Blagrave, .h a , , tip" 'h e had retained the money that was to re-purchase cLe4eannuity, and had been paying it himself. Some 11,,al! afterwards 'rtes absconded, and died abroad, vtliiii• retasel.isThteesaot of h the 'and Blagrave ?f thed -‘, the , Meta of The and they becamerapvoests'esmseldnisotfetrhee tleed of rela.se, the delivery up of vvhieh to b. cancelled w as the object for which the bill was filed. The Masterd ef the tlls, on the rase w as filed. him, decree la favour of cup plaintiff, and fprorenasenbtaetddteocre tkeuprrte: tient petition of re-hearing was I. Dsulr. Bethel], Dlr. RoraillY, and Mr. Nevinson appeared 4 pport of the decision of the Court below , and Alr. Tirane decision Mr. Jas. Russell, and Mr. Tripp were counsel for Mrs Bla rav ~,eTiol'eak argumen:ts were nee,t concluded shortly after two 1, 4 d, ' wh prorogueordship rose to attend the House of , to gParliumenL ttOLLS' COUI-------,...-7-----..(THIS DAY.) NTT,.., , A ItARGRA.VE V. DARGRA'vE. '..`, yGDALE, on corning to this cause on the list, N o] ..‘,'!at he had determined to grant a new trial, a 6,ratt.:Lion to which he had come after considerable deli •l4,ti °n• Ile had been in communication with the Chief ahial.,,se oPou the subject, who had entertained consider eot)aid‘l.l_its on the trial, but that doubt, hovvever, to a IC, la extent, had been removed. till 16442hD5t111, then or the cause to stand over Tia:,!..4st d - ay of Trinity term. k)otirt rose_._.__at eleven o'clock. V / 0 1 , ' h a r -i-CHANCEItY.THIS DAY.) k.tfote the Vice-ChatlCP.llor of ENGLAND.) Olede.l!is 1/0„_, r v.A.!try v. DUNCAN. th e g n 0 , .the 'Vice-Chancellor of England was 0F (4,4. part,h;,°_,le fogstnor.nin the further argumen . ts in e thqted 6, It -Q motion new trial of the issue fac t ' tue Court. —(We gave a short statement of Ili w hen th e e l .. jilt), 31101,01 N (Lion wag opened yes;;erday.) tr,tituot, K, at the conclu.ion of the gave , ki4ad ~ granting 0ef,,,, the mate ; 1 ,i,„ tee a.ttent' .4 a new trial of argument,he on the b en broueht fats had not e e, vvE;all eetrit, the n of the 'Cury. of , i ,„ ,_ . e ea heard cause Petitions none of which (134: e ltre t, or,ZiceChaneellor, Sir J. WrcuAm) ,tilis 40„,1'---•,1 v. SAUNDERS UDCMENT. ,till. Th(1.,114 delivered .judgment this morning in this % a ,' to tertau,qeudant clannel possession and beneficial I,P,a, 6.., .14, lands in %field, in the county of North 4141tirria,4,, 0 1,:14ct to a naortgae.e settlement made on the Nit'tii,„°,ll-00/ ,ea,Q.al Samuel' Saunders, for securing the 'alm a ;„:441 Interest . contract for the sale . of q 1.4 t "as qk tered into for sum of 945 Z., which f til, WaB Stih °l‘ -ar le -sequentl broths off in consequence „ the r 8 b„,,, yen covenant art,, ,v" DeedueXug unable to produce tithoatierds ,vt,ot"el of . eerta.ln title that he 1)3c,i141,.. si;tlNlr. Polt°r'his. solicitor, priopossing e v et to title, deeds. a Saunders t, ''t‘jetel. was entitltnedißtd et rest wit i r A e p long corres 1, od,ri little& „,, o purc:hase. 0 14, f tu her, l'ne present bill was filed to compel 'dear- c't th,'" Lorta his contract or agreement wi_th . th at for the sale of the premises. Ms Honour de Nt.dtks tei6c performance of the contract, an d Th, \ %%under)) should pay the plaintiff his Counteo-.. (ppttx, at ........._three e'elnek. o lii4s 14 I ,t ilkliN (.3 tr.-71,1-11S D AY-) 4441')Q ) ill° 4'l°N L'7I(DEN.KAN, Mr. Justice .) t' 444-00 IVITsiAN, and Mr. Justice mikr. RNott:tns°4nANn 01,,,,, V. GARDNER• show cause 'sit !he, verdict utne,' should not be set keyed for a rule to 'vas 4„: 11(1 a new tr.,, -,:aad in this ease d lire„Mitist the ,52,4` oad, ori the groun th r a o t u t n h d e o v f er ni cli a c - t •-.tott oa 01_ ''lgerlees and also on the i t t"1: The ea; I)a,rt of the Learned Judge_ugs.‘ivehe° i- Cresswelcl c ji , L e last tive' w,s tried before Mr. J tried the diet was returned Itlal‘?,Plaiatiffrl3l3°l , assizes, when recover the money V -• 4)c)7 / • -Llie action Was b a ro v u e g r ht to the 1 4 11 , 1 dlie 'to° ;Llli,efirt count set . forth that of a bankrupt ,11-‘itiecl pierce:tief raintdfs ad ssi glZeecseived by the de. e 'olltrilt ofl3l. his ° usr: Terore il' and bankruptcy; the 'lt ' l' ' r.r his due toe the assignees of Pierce, ' and hire "Ive 4 by th l i , 4,1 a „_ e defenclant.after. his bankruptcy; 11444j4448"1071,90unt, in which the 0/ . 1, The leading plea Ili of to 1- ierce and Hownlan• as the plaintiffs sued as Rll4 f , ~ tt assnapsit. The plaintiff sued a separate !I+lt 0 -Tierce, against who there was._ and ttad . clr'.o 4'Bo as the assi,nee of fierce . Naente' henw,_llo .'were in phartuership together 11% ,i, " la 2,lanOiester, but ?Illy as 1 300 L qe (11114eY were jointly concerned on 31 , . 13 Is 4 ,sh °' They haul only been in Partnership iill ii.)°ll tittle, Pierce havinu, entered into partnership '' is'Y'l'aa on the 2d of OCtober, 1 844, and Were in Niuke'\f haui t 01 Yorksen oOds to Messrs'. Gardner and Co., 13e.,Wth, and uccasionally in the habit of making "ell ta to the same firm for sale, Messrs. Gard.ner.. •,,t„rltlY advancing money upon thew. The consign -. ‘'vete always zu_ade in th e name of Pierce, still i- Were arf ii.p t a sactions and he (Mr. accounts "r°E,1%.1") °llly mentioned'lersl the f^et because - Pt in both names, tho actual sale transactwns 18 Ni E ENI N , NOVEMBER 4, 6. being in the name of the firm, apd the consignments in the Caine of Pierce. The house .in New York had an agent in Maneheseer newt d Gardner, who, however, was not a portlier in the fir in, the fact being borne out by the bankrupts, who were examined on the question at the trial. and one of his objections to the trial at this part of the case was that Gardner was only an agent, but the Learned Judge was of opinion that he must be taken as a principal, and there was some circumstances in the case which favoured this view. 7004 was leaid on ac count of goods supplied in 1844, but it was alleged that 3001. was improperly substracted, :and that that, amount was due to the firm. The larger amount, however, arose out of certain share transactions by Pierce, with which Howman it appeared had nothing whatever to do. These transactions took place solely between Pierce and Gardner. Pierce transacted a great deal of business ' in shares in the autumn of last year, in fact he believed the same:might be said with considerable truth of every ono living in Manchester during that period. Gardner was in the possession of more money than Pierce, and they entered into an arrangement to transact business in shares together, Gardner acting as the broker. Gard ner bought largely for Pierce, and paid the money for him, taking, however, the precaution to protect him self against loss, by returning the shares in his hands, selling them, however, whenever Pierce wished him to do so. He had a general authority to sell these shares, when the market was in a favourable state ; and there was also an understanding that in those transactions there should always be a margin in Gardner's favour, in order that he might thus be protected against what ever fluctuations might take place in the value of the shares. On the 30th of September Pierce wanted some money, and in order to obtain it he gave Gardner.bills of exchange to the amount of 2,5001., in the name of Pierce and Howman, and scrip in the North Staffordshire Railway, and received 1,9001. on account of them. He gave an acknowledgement to the effect that he had received 420 scrip shares iu the North Staffordshire as a security for the payments at maturity of Messrs. Pierce and Howman's acceptances, at sixty days from this date, the 30th September, for 2,5001., and agreeing to return the scrip when the acceptances were paid, or sell them at Pierce's request, with power to hold sufficient of the proceeds to indemnify himself any loss on the bills which he might continue to hold. It was urged at the trial that these transaction did not go into the general account, and that Mr. Gardner had not the power to sell them to protect himself against any deficiency in the general account, and that they were only placed in his hands to cover the sum of 2,500/., if so, 4221. was due on them, that being the difference between the price at the time they were deposited and the time they were sold. as they fell in the market. The bills were paid, and the it was contended, became the property of Pierce. Shares in the Glasgow and Dumfries Railway were also deposited with Gardner on 27th of October, 1845, under a similar agreement, Gardner advancing 2,0001. upon them. The agreement by which he was to advance 3,0001. more on these shares, in No. 1772, was dated the 22d of October, end stated ,that the money should be paid in sums cf 1,0001. each, the last instalment to be paid on the 18th of No vember. The shares .fell in value, and 1,0001. remained unpaid. The plaintiff sought to recover the money for which they were sold, but the defendant contended that the transaction was carried to the general account. The Learned Counsel held that the defendant was liable for the difference. A fiat was issued against Pierce and Howman on the 27th of December, and Gardner satisfied all the claims which Pierce could make upon him. Evidence was given at the trial that, at the time of these negotiations, the firm was in an insolvent state. Arrangements were made with the firm of Messrs. Gardner, in New York, by which a settlement of their accounts was brought about. Therefore, he contended that, on the 22d of December, before the fiat was issued, a complete settlement of the goods account between the parties was brought about, and that a settlement of their share account was also mad The Learned Judge at the trial stated that this wonld he an answer to the action, provided the transaction was a bcna fide one, and provided Gardner had no notice of the acts of bank ruptcy. The jury after being out several hours, re• turned into Court, when the foreman said that there was no direct evidence of the defendant having had any knowledge of the act of bankruptcy, and inquired if they were therefore bound to find for the defendant. Mr. Justice Cresswell said they were not, but they must look at the surrounding circumstances. They found for the plaintiff. He grounded his application first on the misdirection on the part of the Learned Judge, in reply ing to the question, and that en the evidence the jury ought to have found for the defendant. Lord DENMAN granted a general rule. THE BUSINESS OF THE COURT. Lord DENMAN intimated that the special paper would not . be taken until after term, but that the Crown cases would be proceeded with in their natural course. The new trial paper will be taken on Tuesdays and Fridays. LUNAR AND CALENDAR MONTH.—SIMPSON V. MARGER SON AND OTHERS. Mr. WATSON, Q.C., moved for a rule to show cause why the verdict which the plaintiff had obtained in this case should not be entered for the defendant. The plain tiff is an auctioneer in the city of London, and the de fendants devizees of an estate in Norfolk. They em ployed the plaintiff to sell the estate, agreeing to pay him cne per cent. on the purchase money if sold by auction and within two months after so employing him, and one and a half per cent. if not sold by auction, or within two months after, at the reserved price. The property was not sold by auction, and the plaintiff claimed 4251., but the defendants refused to pay him more than 225/. 55., as they sold the estate slightly over two lunar months, and less than two calendar months. The Court granted the application. THE CASE OF MR. WILLIAM CORBETT. It will be recollected that Mrs. Cobbett applied to this Court on the first day of term to exercise its authority to obtain the liberation of her husband, Mr. William Cobbett, from the Queen's Bench, where he is confined, in pursuance of a writ issued by the Court of Exche quer of " rebellion," or disobeying the injunctions of that Court. Lord DENMAN, oberving Mrs. Cobbett in the Court, said she had urged in support of her application that the writ on which her husband was committed was not pro perly issued, and the return writ irregular and false. Her statement was not, however, supported by affidavits; but even if her representations were bqrne out, the Court could not interfere with the proceedings of the Exche quer in the matter. If there was tinything wrong, ap. plication should be made to the Court of Exchequer to rectify it. The Court could not, therefore, entertain her application. Airs. Cobbett then retired. BAIL COURT.-(THIS DAY.) ;Sittings in Banco, before Mr. Justice PATTESON.) PEACOCK V. SWINDLE. Mr. TEMPLE applied for a rule to show cause why the verdict given for the defendant in this case should not be set aside, Ist, on the ground that the verdict was against the evidence, and the personal misconduct of the jury, 2ndly, that the deputy-sheriff bad refused evidence on the part of the plaintiff, and idly, on the ground that the deputy-sheriff bad permitted the case to be con ducted in an improper manner. • The action was tried at Middleham, in Yorkshire. The account was for 5/. ss. for sacks which had been delivered containing flour. The defendant pleaded, Ist, nutnquarn indebitatus, 2dly, payment, and idly, that sacks had been delivered in exchange. The cause was tried at a public house, and both before and after the trial the defendant's attorney treated the jury to spirits, &c., and although not a word of the evidence went to support the defendant's pleas, the verdict was given in his favour.—Rule granted. EXPARiK BROOK AND HINCKLEY. Mr. PASIILEY moved for a rule to show cause why a mandamus should not issue to two magistrates named Brooke an d Hi nckley, ordering them to hear an appli cation for an order in bastardy. The Act under which the application was made was the 7th and Bth Victoria, cap. 101, and the question to be decided was one of very considerable importance, viz., whether, after the order was obtained by the woman, and afterwards abandoned, an application for a new one - could be entertained on the defendant's costs being paid. The mother, in the present case, obtained a summons from Mr. Brooke, and the case came on before Messrs. Brooke and Baker, and was adjourned to the 17th. On this occasion Messrs. Brooke and Hinckley presided, and the orders were made. The attorney on the other side said that he should appeal against the decision, as when the second hearing came on before different magistrates, the woman had not been sworn. The attorney for the woman felt that the objection was fatal. After some further discussion the weman again attempted to bring the case before the magistrates. The attorney on the other side, who was clerk to the magistrates, refused to allow the case to be reconsidered until his costs in the firmer application had been paid. On his receiving 30s. he proceeded to renew his former objections. At length the magistrates refused to hear the case until they had the authority of the Court of Queen's Bench.--Rule granted. (Sittings at Nisi Prius.) SCOTT V. KENT. This was an action to recover the sum of 261. ss. sd. for the use and occupation of apartments, and for goods sold and delivered. Mr. Petersdorff and Mr. Lush appeared for the plain tiff; the defendant was undefended. The action was brought by Mr. Scott, formerly the proprietor of Fendall's Hotel. In December last the defendant came to the hotel, and stated that he was engaged in a cause at Westminster • hall. He brought a number of witnesses with him. The cause lasted five days, and during that time both he and all the witnesses called for whatever they wished. There were several items for spiritous liquors under 205., and as the defendant had pleaded 'that 4/. 15s. of the sum in that account was for spit ituous liquors under 205., that sran was struck out, and a verdict returned for the plaintiff, for th e sum o f 21 1 . 10s. sd. EXCHEQUER..-(THIS DAY ) (Sittings in Banco.) WEBB V. WATTS. Mr. MARTIN moved for a new trial in this case. It appeared that the plaintiff was employed upon ono of the numerous railway schemes of the last year (the Irish West Coast Railway). An engagement had been made with plaintiff by a Mr. Campbell, who had the management of the company's affairs, by virtue of which agreement the plaintiff was to proceed to Ireland, and take the traffic on behalf of the company. The plaintiff accordingly went to Ireland, and in pursuance of his intentions proceeded to adopt the necessary measures for taking the traffic, and the necessary tables for Par liamentary deposit. Subsequently plaintiff brought bis action against thb defendant, who was one of the pro visional committee of the railway in question, which was tried at Nottingham, during the last ass i zes, b efore Mr. Justi!e Creswell, ' the result of which was that the plaintiff was nonsuited. The Court granted a rule for a new trial. (Sittings in Nisi Prius, before Mr. 13aron PLATT and C,ltnon Juucs.) I.3IIAPBEER V. JOll2 ON. This action (which was in part heard yesterday) was brought by the plaintiff; John Bradbeer, to recover from the ilefendatit, Mr. Johinor, damages for false imprison ment. SeVeral witnesses were who &posed to the fact of John Bradbeer, the plaintiff, and his brother, Richard Bradbeer, having . been present at the bar of the Mitre Tavern, So:ner s-mews, Paddington, kept by the defendant, and while there, creating a disturbance, and using abusive language to the defendant and his wife, and that a policeman was called, to whom the de fendant gave Richard Bradbeer into custody, but that John Bradbeer, the plaintiff; was not given into custody. The inspector of police at the station-house was not able, however, to identify the party who was given into custody. The charge was entered on the sheet as Richard Bradbeer. Mr. WIIITEHURST, for the defendant, contended that there'W ILI no evidence at all to show that the defendant had given the plaintiff into custody. Mr. Baron PLATT summed up, and the jury returned a verdict for the defendant. COMMON PLEAS—(THIS DAY.) . (Sittings in Banco.) TUCKER V. HORKINGS. Mr. Sergeant MURPHY moved for a rule to set aside a verdict in this case, which was tried at last Liverpool Assizes, before Mr. Justice Cresswell. The action had arisen on a debt secured by a bond due by the defendant to a person named John Tucker, deceased, and proceed ings were instituted by one of the executors, Richard Tucker, to recover the same. The verdict was given to the plaintiff, and the rule was to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial. The main point submitted by the Learned Gentleman „as the Statute of Limitations as applied to bonds, and he contended that the Learned Judge at trial had not put the construction on the sta tute, as applied to this case, which should have been given. —Rule nisi granted. PARSON V. SEXTON AND ANOTHER. Mr; Sergeant BYLES moved for a rule in this case to show cause why the verdict should not be entered for the plaintiff for 1171., or why there should not be a new trial. The action was tried at the last sittings after term in Middlesex, before Mr. Justice Erle, and a verdict given for the defendant would leave the plaintiff to move. The plaintiff was an engineer in Lambeth, and the defend ants were millowners at - Uxbridge. The dispute had arisen about a steam-engine. The whole transactions between the parties amounted to 3564 19s. 6d., but prior to the action being brought 2321. 12s. was paid. Credit was given by the plaintiff fbr this sum, and also for a set off of 71., and another part for the balance. The defence was that the enginewas bought by the defendant with the understanding that it was of 14-horse power, but that it really was only of 9 horse power. The de fendants refused taking the sum, agreed to deduct an equivalent for the deficiency. The evidence as to the power of the engine was very cot Meting. Some engi neers affirming it was equal to 14-horse power while others denied it. The delendant contended that the plaintiff warranted the engine to be a 14-horse engine. The latter denied there was any express warranty, and contended that had there been any express warranty the proper course would have been to proceed for breach of contract.—Rule nisi granted. RICKETTS V. BENNETT AND OTHERS.—THE WEAL PROVIDENCE MINING COMPANY. Mr. CROWDER moved for a new trial in this case, which was tried at the last Cornwall Assizes, before Mr. Baron Platt, and in which the verdict was for defendant, on the !ground of misdirection, and that the verdict was against evidence. The plaintiffs were bankers at Truro, and the defendants were adventurers in the Weal Providence Mining Company. The mine bad been in existence for several years, and a banking account was opened with the Messrs. Ricketts in September, 1844, by Mr. Robinson, who was one of the company in ques tion. The action was for the balance of account due, 3,6681. At the time of the opening of the account the purser of the Weal Providence mine was the son of Mr. Robinson referred to, but he was succeeded in the situation by a Mr. Bennett. On the trial it was argued that the company could not be made responsible for the acts of Robinson, he never having received express in structions to borrow. It was likewise ruled by the Learned Judge that oneparticular director could not thus pledge the credit of the others without express powers. The real question at issue was, whether a mining com pany was different in its character to ordinary partner ship. The Learned Judge ruled that it was, while the plaintiffs contended that it was not. They did not mean to affirm that Robinson had acted under any express authority, yet that he did under an implied authority. Rule granted. WONTNER V. SHAIRP—THE DIRECT LONDON AND —.— EXETER RAILWAY. Mr. BRAMWELL moved fora rule to show cause wby the verdict in this cause should not be set aside, and a nonsuit entered. The case was one of considerable im portance, and was tried during the after-sittings of last term, in Middlesex, before Mr. Ju,tice Erle. The ver dict was given for the plaintiff, 821. 10s. The plaintiff was Thomas Wontner, a solicitor, the defendant a pro visional director of the Direct London and Exeter Rail way. The plaintiff claimed the recovery of the-deposit of 11.75. 6d. on each cf 60 shares on two grounds—lst, that of the 11. 7s. 6d. on each share, 11. ss. was paid for the purpose of completing the Parliamentary deposit, but the company having failed to proceed to Parliament, the plaintiff was entitled to recover the 11. ss. ; and 2d, that in consideration of the total failure of the com pany to fulfil its pledges, and on the ground of fraud, he was entitled to the whole sum of 821. 10s., the deposit of 60 shares. A verdict was given for the plaintiff. The company was formed on the 4th of June, 1845, and the defendant was appointed a provisional director. On the 16th of September he was nominated one of the manag ing committee. A prospectus was issued, and on the 25th of the same month the plaintiff applied for shares, which were allotted to him. On the 11 th the plaintiff received a letter which stated that the deposit of IL 7s. 6d. must be paid within eight days at the bankers named, else the shares would be forfeited. On the 17th of October follow ing an advertisement from the company appeared, and it was on this that the plaintiff mainly depended. It stated, the committee have " completed the allotment." It subsequently appeared that only 58,000 shares had been allotted, and it was on this that the charge of fraud was made to rest, and the verdict of the jury obtained. The Learned Gentlemen went at great length into the history of the' transac tions of the company, and contended that the Learned Judge had misdirected the jury, and that the deed of settlement under which the compauy was formed did not state that the capital of the company should be made up of shares to the number of 120,000. Rule to show cause granted. BOW-STREET. —(THIS DAY.) Wm. Gulling, a young man in the service of Mr. Watts, printer, of 3, Cr own - court, Pi ckett-street, was placed at the bar before Mr. Henry, charged with steal ing a quantity of books, &c., the property of his employer. He bad been remanded from this day week. It appeared that since the last examination, the officer whO . had taken the prisoner (Serjeant Pocock, F 14) had been to his lodgings, and had found there nine books, all of which were identified by the prosecutor as his property, and also a quantity of sheets of paper and a number of letters and memorandums. The prisoner said that all the books were waste copies, and he had taken them without any idea of injuring Mr. Watts. Mr. Watts denied that the books were waste, but added that the felonies as yet discovered were unim. portant in comparison with some that were supposed to have been committed by the prisoner. He would esta blish a charge against the prisoner of stealing several hundred reams of paper, his acknowledgments of which were in the paper merchant's hands, but never had been accounted for ; and also a charge of having received large sums of money from customers which he never accounted for, and which indeed he had no authority to receive. The prisoner was remanded till Tuesday week. MARLBRU-STREET.-.--(THIS DAY.) Matilda Hassod and Eliza Good were charged before Mr. Hardwick with violently assaulting Mrs. Best in the street, and robbing her of her money and wearing apparel. Mrs. James Best, living at 9, Nelson-street, Camden town, said she had been out shopping, anti returning home about half-past seven o'clock last night, when in the New road, at the corner of Tottenham-court-road, as she was waiting the carriages passing by, the prisoner Hassod came up and attacked her.. She tore her bonnet off her head, and after stripping it of the veil, threw it on the pavement. Eliza Good at this time came up, and seized complainant about the middle, and held her till Hassod took a purse from her, containing 4s. 6d., a par cel containing the articles she had been purchasing, and her veil, and made off with them. The defendant, Good, then let her go, called a cab, and drove off. George Waufor, who saw the transaction, corroborated complainant's evidence. He followed Hassod, and gave her into custody. Both the defendants denied any felonious intent. • They were committed for trial. SOUTH W ARK.—( THIS DAY.) Margaret Murphy, a woman with a child in her arms, was charged with the following fraud : The prisoner watched until she saw a printer's wife, in Thomas -street, leave the house, and her back was no sooner turned than the former went into the shop, and producing three book-slates, told the daughter of the woman of the house, that her mother had sent her there with the book-slates, and that she was to give her 7s. 6d. for them. The daughter, believing the statement, ac cordingly gave the money, and she went away • when, however, th e mot h er returned, it was found the slates were nearly valueless. The prisoner was subsequently found drinking in a public-house, and given,into custody. She pleaded that she was in great distress, and had seven fatherless children. She was committed for trial. CLERREN WELL—... — (THIS DAY.) John Gayer, J ames C arr, and Henry Wilkinson were charged on remand, the two former with stealing a large quantity of valuable mahogany, and the last with re ceiving the same. knowing it to be stolen. Mr. 11. Walker stated that he was a cabinet-maker, residing in Pear -tree-court, and Carr and Gayer had been in his employment for some years. Having re ceived some information which induced him to think the prisoners Carr and Gayer were robbing him, he caused a watch to be kept, when they were seen carry ing away three large Planks of mahogany. Two police men followed them in plain clothes, and, saw them enter the _house of Wilkinson, who kept a kind of marine store or general shop, and upon sear c hi ng there the constables found a quantity of other wood, which the prosecutor identified as his property. Mr. GBENNWOOD Committed the prisoners for trial. , WORCESTER, TENBURY, AND LUDLOW R A ILW Ay.—( TB IS DAY.) A special greet al me( ting of ti :.e shareholder- the Worcester, Tenbury, and Ludlow Railway Company was held this morning at the offices of the eompary, for the purpose of determining the propriety or otherwise of again applying to Parliament for the Dill next session, and for the purpose of considering and approving of any further call on the capital of the company to meet the required deposit in the Court of Chancery, and on other special business ; Mr. James Davies, one of the directors, in the chair. The SECRETARY stated that a private meeting of the directors had been held that morning, at which the fol lowing resolution was unanitnonsly agreed to :—" That, under the extraordinary circumstances which have trens• pired respecting Captain Richardson, and the subsequent prosecution of him at the Old Bailey, he be expelled from his office of chairman of this Company, and also from being a director." The CHAIRMAN stated that the shareholders had been called together to determine what they would do upon learning that a rival company was in the field, and sur veying the line to go to Parliament next year. The Company's proceedings had been exceedingly unfortu nate, and the expenses very heavy, but still it was for the shareholders t o cons i der whether they could not sell their plans and sections, or improve their prospects by putting themselves in a defensive position for the ensuing session. Mr. FRY, in answer to a question, stated that an agreement was originally come to with the Porthdyn laen Company, but since Government had fixed upon Holyhead as their harbour of refuge, the Great Western Company had abandoned their line and repudiated the agreement. Mr. KNoetrs said, that before determining what course they ought to pursue, they should know how their funds stood. Mr. FRY replied that Mr. Knocks himself had inves tigated the accounts, and the result of that investigation was disclosed at their last meeting, when it appeared to be satisfactory. Mr. Fry then entered into a detailed statement of the proceedings that had been taken against Captain Richardson, remarking that the directors bad taken possession of the sum of 3,2001., which was found in Captain Richardson's house immediately after his arrest, but the money could not at pre sent be touched, because one or two of Captain Richardson's creditors were taking legal proceedings to have it applied to the liquidation of their claims. The money was found concealed between the leaves of a book, and he had no doubt it was part of the funds of that company. He had been a good deal troubled in the matter, and so cleverly had Captain Richardson, pre vious to his arrest, duped him with assumed endeavours to discover the real culprit, that he (Mr. Fry) was actu ally watched to his own house at Sydenham, and sus pected of being concerned in the fraud. ---(Laughter.) A PROPRIETOR wished to know if it was intended to take any further proceedings against Capt. Richardson ? Mr. FRY replied that if counsel advised any it would be for the shareholders to decide whether they should be taken or not.—(Hear, hear.) A PROPRIETOR asked how the directors came to ap point Captain Richardson as chairman ? Mr. FRY replied that he was introduced to them by Mr. Attwood, the banker, who said he intended to make him Member of Parliament for Harwich. Mr. HARDING, one of the directors, said the directors thought, under existing circumstances, and in the present sate of the money market, it was not advisable to go to Parliament again. There was, however, the Shrews bury and Hereford Company, who would be glad of their plans, and the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolver hampton, with whom they could negotiate. To the first company their line would be invaluable, while he knew, for a fact, that the latter company looked upon it with a jealous eye, and he had no doubt when they found there was a narrow gauge interest in the field they would be too glad to get hold of it. Mr. ARDEN suggested that under these circumstances the meeting had better be adjourned till a future day, the directors undertaking to negotiate with any com pany disposed to take up their line, and generally to do everything calculated to secure and advance the inter ests of the company. A. lengthened discussion then arose upon the expe diency of again prosecuting Captain Richardson, but eventually it was determined to leave the matter in the hands of the directors. A resolution in accordance with Mr. Arden's sugges tion, and adjourning the meeting till the 2d of Decem ber, was then agreed to, and a vote of thanks having been passed to the chairman, the meeting broke up. LORD MAlroa's DAY.—It is arranged that the line of the pageant shall be from Guildhall along King street, Cheapside, Poultry, Cornhill, Gracechurch street, King William street, Arthur -street to Fish. monger' Hall, London-bridge, where his Lordship and the Civic authorities will embark and proceed to West minster Hall, returning from thence to Blackfriar's bridge, and disembarking at the new pier, will, after meeting the Learned Judges in Fleet -street, proceed to the banquet at Guildhall. EARLY SITTING OF THE CITY POLICE-COURTS.— Sir George Carroll, the Lord Mayor elect, has signified his intention of commencing the proceedings at the Mansion - housePolice-court,every day during his mayor alty, at ten o'clock instead of twelve, as at present. This plan, it is understood, will also be adopted at Guildhall, the Bankruptcy, and other City courts. GREAT TROTTING MATCH FOR 50/.—On Tuesday the match between Mr. Robson's grey horse and Mr. Baker's brown mare, to trot two miles in harness, for 251. aside, came off at Wimbledon-common. At the start the mare took the lead and was gaining on her opponent, when she broke out to a gallop and was pulled in. The grey horse passed her, and concluded the first mile in 3 min. and 37 sec. In the next half mile the mare had come up to her adversary, and both horses were pressed, when the mare took the lead, which she maintained, and ultimately went in the winner by 15 yards, and covered the two miles of road in 7 min. 10 sec. It is stated that some disagreement has arisen be tween the South-Eastern and Brighton and South Coast Companies respecting the use of the Bricklayers' Arms station by the latter. REDUCTION IN THE P RICE OF BREAD.—Yesterday there was a gene ra l re d uction of one penny in the 41b. loaf, in Lambeth, B e th nal-green, Whitechapel, and Tottenham-court-road ; t h e best being 7d., and house hold 60. The West- en d b akers still, however, maintain the same price, Bd. an d 10d. MAILS FOR BRAZIL, &c. —Yesterday notice was issued at the General Post-office, St. Martin's-le-Grand, that her Majesty's brig Peterel, Captain Cresor, would sail for Falmouth, with the mails for Madeira, Brazil, Buenos Ayres, Rio Janeiro, Monte Video, Bahia, and Pernambuco, on the arrival of the post from London of the evening of the 4th instant. Letters in time this evening. CONSUMPTION OF TURNIPS.---The common white globe turnip is selling freely in this market at ls. per cwt. The supply is scarcely Equal to the demand. The crop is an excell e nt one, i n many cases fully 40 tons to the acre, and y e t how difficult it is to persuade some people to sow t urn i ps. At what time were potatoes worth 401. an ac re ?—Dowitpatrick Recorder. GLUTTONY.— SeveraI citizens of Craborchard, Ken tucky, certify to the Louisville Democrat, which pre viously doubted th e story, that on the day of their late election a man name d Richard Evans, in the open street and broiling sun, on t h e top of the stage, in presence of all who wer e a b out the polls, made his dinner on fourteen chicken s , d ran k forty cups of coffee, nine pints of whisky, an d ate ginger cakes and other things in pro portion, and ca ll e d for more chickens. Before dinner he weighed 138 pounds; after, 148 pounds. If he had been hungry he could have eaten an entire mutton, and, with a little practice, gone the whole hog." This goes ahead of all the gormandizing I h ave ever know n , thou g h I have heard of extraordinary feats in that line in Phila delphia in my youthful days. Not long since a nobleman in Engla n d l a id a bet with an associate of his, that he would prod uce a man that would eat against anY man in all England The bet was accepted, and the parties met at Doncaster at the appointed time. His Lordship could not attend, but sent his agent to see fair play and apprise him of the result. In due time he received, by post, the following lines from the agent:— "Doncaster, June 15, 18- - Ev ‘ a ‘ l l : s e m a i r a S ht ir c ,— ha T ile h n e gme mail is ` a pig and an apple " time to say to your Lordshsirth boats hr.ught m in il f e r s om or s:o o o wn closing, and I have only victor —NEwQuAY. antagonist by out On to M a o v n e d s vessel e 3 eveningfi ? l l 1 L i c c a t ntl last, e h l r e ; 1 s drivingn E s t y. , which„ from 15,000 very fine pilchards, and very large shoals were to seen about a mile and a half or two Head. The crew of a boat that was going passed through a large shoal, and actually took up with to be all their hands ninety-two fine fish. The crews were all mustered on Monday evening and Tuesday inore i e „, ; Wearne St. Ives—On Tuesday last the bay was found to be full of fish, and about twenty scans were shot. The follow ingthe a fa re ve t e h r e eh es le ti s m te a t t e ed ef q t u h a e n w tit e i e e t s he i r n , cl a o r s e ed likely landed:—Hiebens and Co., 5,000 hogsheads and Co., 5,000; Tremearne and Co., 4,000; Bolithe and r h o i w s s d e e a r t , Co., 3,000; Architect Co., 3,000; Union Co., 1,000; Faithful Co., 2,000. Total, 23,000 hogsheads. r'encleen of —On Tuesday morning last, the scan at this place was shot, on a large shoal of pilchards, but in consequence of there not being any men in pay, only a few hogsheads were saved.—Falmouth Packet. The new Recorder of Bristol, R. 8.. o E a sq 3l ., o Q n . d C ay , .suc T ee h s i s s o g r e t n o tl S e i m r judgea C n . is W al e s t o h e e p re p l e l, i : eod C k the Tolzey Court. It was expected that in his first charge to the grand jury he would have introduced him self to the citizens by som e referen ce to the circum stances which led to his appointment, but he e n t ered at once upon the cases enumerat ed in th e calendar. I t i s stated that counsels' opinions have be en taken by sonic parties as to tha legality of this appointment, b y the Government, recorder is 400/ per annum, a n d as judge of the Tolzey Court 2 001 . ; in addition t o w hi ch 1002 a salary a s year is allowed for travelling expenses. OPENING OF THE PORTS.—The decision of the Cabinet not to open the ports for the free admissiot t of foreign grain is satisfactory to all parties in Liverpool, with the exception of the speculators and a few extreme free trade advocates. The opening of the ports would not influence one single cargo to this country, .nor re duce the poor man's loaf the smallest fraction of our least coin, but would for the moment have given an im pulse to speculation, and have put the amount of duty into the pockets of the present holders and foreign growers. The fire in the corn-market seems subsiding, and prices in Liverpool are somew hat e as i er this week, with a slackening in the demand ; and as the shipments: from America come forward prices will , no doubt, re cede, even if the farmers continue to keep back supplies. Speculation, and not the wants of the trade, is the pause of the late rapid advance.--Liverpool Albion. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OP CHANCERY, Nov. 3. IN RE PENDER. This case came before the Court upon appeal from the decision of the Master of the Rolls, who decided that an unsigned bill of costs might be the subject of taxation, and from that decision the appeal was brought. The LORD CIrANCELLOR•, at the conclusion of the argument, said he would endeavour to give judgment to morrow morning. The Court then proceeded to hoar lunatic petitions, taking the unopposed. toft, a few mires from Yarmouth. Remembers getting to YoxfOnl about thirty miles from Yarmouth, and there hiA attention v...‘s called to Mr. Lacon, who had been on the box. There were some words between Mr. Lacon and the coachman about an excess of luggage and passengers on the coach. Mr. Lacon sent for a post-chaise and left the coach. This was the plaintiff's case. Mr. CROWDER hating addressed the jury, and called certain witnesses to testify as to the loading of the coach, and Mr. WATSOir having replied at some length, The Learned JUDGE summed up, and said that he certainly did not consider that the contract for the seat meant allowing a given quantity of room abstractedly from all other considerwions, for much inconvenience might arise from such an interpretation. The question for the jury, after all, was, whether the coach was so overloaded as to render the travelling in it •f a dangerous character. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Nov. 3. (Sittings in Nisi Prius, before Mr. Baron PLATT and a common jury.) BROWN 4.ND LANGSIDE V. PROUD. In this case which was one of that very numerous class arising out of the " railway department," and which was tried at the last Kent Assizes before Mr. Justice Coltman, a verdict was given for the plaintiff for the sum of 544/. 18s., being the amount claimed for work and labour done as an engineering surveyor for and on behalf of the Direct London and Hastings Railway. The defendant was a member of the provisional com mittee of the said company. Mr. Sergeant SHE♦ now moved for leave to enter a verdict for the defendant on the ground that he was not indebted to 'the plaintiffs, and that he had never employed them to survey the line in question. It appeared that the plaintiffs were employed by two persons of the name of Smith and Ryder, who were described on the prospectuses as engineers to the company. On behalf of the plaintiffs, it was endeavoured to be shown upon the trial that in the case of persons so employed by the engineer, it was the general usage for them .to look for payment from th e com p a ny, and not. to the engineer. The witness, however, called to prove this " general usage," could not state or particularise any case in which such usage or custom pre vailed, and in cross-examination stated, that "it pre vailed in large companies, but not in small ones." The -Learned Counsel now contended that such evidence should not have been left to the jury, as it was not sufficiently explicit to substantiate the fact. The plaintiffs had also sent their account to Messrs. Smith and Ryder, and in consequence of its not having been paid, they had threatened them with legal pro ceedings for the recovery of the same, thereby clearly showing that they did not consider the defendant in debted to them, nor was any agreement produced in which it could be shown that either the defendant or the company were at all liable for the payment of the plaintiffs. Upon these grounds, therefore, it was contended that leave should be given to enter a verdict for the defendant. The Court stated that they would take time for the purpose of referring to Mr. Justice Coltmen's note upon the evidence given at the trial. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 3 (Sittings in Banco before Lord Chief Justice Sir Taos. WILDE, Mr. Justice MADLE, Mr. Justice PATTISON, and Mr. Justice V. VI/mm.4ms.) OATHS OF ABJURATION AND SUPREHAM-011 the assembling of the Court this morning, the oaths of abju ration and supremacy were severally administered by the Clerk of the Court to the Lord Chief Justice and Mr. Vaughan Williams. PATER V. BAKER. CHARGE OF SLANDER.—Mr. Sergeant CHANNEL moved for a'rule in this case, which was tried during the last sittings after term in Middlesex, before Mr. Justice Erle. The rule sought was to set aside the verdict which was then obtained for the plaintiff, damages lel 125., and to enter a nonsuit, or else to grant a new trial, on the ground that the verdict was against evidence. The Learned Judge on the trial thought there was just enough of evidence to allow the case to go to the jury, though he (Mr. Sergeant Channel) believed the Learned Judge was not satisfied with the verdict. Leave at the same time was granted to move on another point, and to obtain leave to enter a nonsuit. The action arose from what is called a slander of title, and originated in the folloxing circumstances:--The plaintiff, Mr. Pater, was a solicitor, and A-siding in a part of the parish of St. Pancras, called Agar-town, and had been fcr some time agent and collector for the gentleman from whom the name of the district was derived, and in the course of business he had erected twelve houses. While in an unfinished state, he adver tised them for sale, and a Mr. Kennedy was employed at the auctioneer. On the day of the sale, the de fendent, who is district surveyor under the Metro politan Building Act, attended the room, and before the business commenced, addressed the company to the following effect:—His object, in attending the sale, was to inform the purchasers, if any present intended to be such, that he would not allow the houses in question to be finished or occupied till the roads in connexion with them were finished. He could not compel the roads to be finished, but he wished to inform purchasers that they would have to keep the carcases till the roads were made. This was the main count in the charge. There was another, which stated that several; persons, in con sequence of this intimation from Mr. Baker, declined to purchase. The plaintiff denied that the roads were in the state represented, and that they were sufficient for conformity with the Act, and an action was accordingly brought to recover damages. The plea of the defendant was not guilty, and in his defence, he went to show that the road way to the houses was not such as the provisions of the Act required, and that the drains were in a most imperfect state. In regard to the charges of Mr. B a k er res p ec ti ng th e property, some time after the day of the sale the matter was re ferred to the Commissioners, and they caused a. view of the property , to be taken. Th - e official referees decided that the drains were in an imperfect state, but that there was a roadway to the front of the houses wide enough to allow a scavenger's cart to p ass , an d therefcre wide enough for the requirements of the Act ; but that it was in a very rough and unfinished state. The defendant, however, in respect to the road, called attention to the fact, that since the time he had attended the sale it had been much improved ; and further, that the whole pro perty of Mr. Agar, of which Mr. Pater was agent, was in a most imperfect state in regard to drainage and road accommodation. The defendant, in the course he had taken, acted from no malicious motives, but from a strong sense of his duty to the public, a fact which the judge had commented on when summing up. He (Mr. Sergeant Channel) hoped, therefore, that their Lord ships would grant the rule to show cause against the verdict, and that they would consult the judge as to whether he had considered the verdict satisfactorily. Rule nisi granted to show cause against the verdict. DAWSON V. MORRISON.—LIABILITY OF PROVISIONAL DIRECTORS.—THE OXFORD, WITNEY, CHELTENHAM, AND GLOUCESTER INDEPENDENT RAILWAY. This action was tried at the last Surrey assizes, before Mr. Justice Coltman, and a verdict given for the defen dant. A rule was now sought to set aside the verdict, on the grounds that it was against evidence and for mis direction. The plaintiff was Mr. Dawson, the advertising agent, who sought to recover 4961. for advertisements in serted in various newspapers, announcing a cer tain railway scheme, called the Oxford, Pitney, Cheltenham, and Gloucester Independent Railway; the defendant was Mr. James Morrison, of St. Mary-at hill, one of the provisional directors of the said company. In the first prospectus of the company, advertised by the plainiiff, the name of the defendant was found as provisional director, and it appeared subsequently with a number of others. He had also been seen on several occasions at the office of the company, 58, Gracechurch street. The latter point had not been much &Tended on at the trial, as there was another company which met at the same address, of which the defendant was a shareholder. In answer to the action, the defendant denied his liability, and pleaded that he was not one of the com mittee of management, though his name had appeared as a member of the provisional committee. The allot ment of the shares, it was alleged in the prospectus, was placed entirely in the hands of the managing committee, as also the receiving of the deposits aind the application of the funds; therefore, there being no duties or powers specially conferred on the general provisional committee, they could not be made liable for the account of the de fendant. Besides, the plaintiff denied that he had allowed his name to be used. The plaintiff, on the other hand, affirmed that the managing committee acted under the general committee, and that the latter were equally responsible ; that the applications for shares were addressed to the provisional committee ; and that it bad been proved on one occasion that the defendant, on being referred to as a director to give information as to the respectability of an application, wrote against the party's name, " Very good." This was an admission, though not in express terms, that he was a director of the company. If he was a director, then the plaintiff maintained that he was responsible for the debts contracted, though the Learned Judge had instructed the jury otherwise, and that from the terms of the prospectus, the managing committee appeared to be the responsible party, they being ad vertised separately from the general committee. A verdict was accordingly given for the defendant. The LORD CHIEF J - USTICE said the present case did not turn simply on the construction of the prospectus, bat received aid and effect from the document which had been referred to, and the letters addressed to the provi sional committee. Thbugh the prospectus might not bear the construction that the provisional committee were the parties before whom such applications were laid, it would appear by the letter wherein the defendant had been referred to as a director, that though he had not signed expressly as such, he had made some admission of it by signing against the party's name" Very good." Inasmuch as the question of the liability of the provisional committee did not arise from the legal construction of the terms of the pro spectus, but was to be taken from its effects and other facts in relation to the transactions of the company, the judge had properly left the whole question to the jury, and the rule fur misdirection could not go. But on ac count of the great general importance of the case, and in order that the question might be fully considered by the Court, the rule to show cause that the verdict was against evidence would be granted. Rule nisi accordingly granted. OXFORD, WORCESTER, AND WOLVERHAMPTON RAILWAY.—The works on a great portion of this line are progressing rapidly. Sixteen miles will be opened iu the autumn of next year. A POACHER SnoT.---During Friday night last, as the gamekeeper at FiHingham, near Lincoln, was going his rounds, he encountered four poachers, and the issue was a struggle in which the life of one of them was sa crificed. The deceased struck the gamekeeper with hii gun, which at the instant went off and shot its owner. IN THE MATTER OF DYCE SOMBRP. ROLLS' COURT, Nov. 3. THE MARQUIS OP HERTFORD V. LORD LOWTHER. VICE. CHANCERY COURT, ../Vov. 3. (Before Vice-Chancellor WIGRAM.) CAMPBELL V. THE BRIGHTON RAILWAY COMPANY. This was a bill filed against the Brighton Railway Company to test the question whether the holders of notes, issued on the loan of 300,0001., can claim the conversion of their notes into shares, if due notice be given of this intention previous to the year 1847. It appears that the company in 1842 resolved to raise a loan of 300,0001., and issued 401. loan notes for five years at five per cent., and on the back of the note was an endorsement which gave the acceptor the option of converting his notes into quarter shares of 10/., upon due notice being given before the 15th February, 1845. The defendants contend that these stipulations were clearly embodied in the advertisement for the loan, the tender, and the endorsement on the loan note, and that while the option to convert was given, it was yet limited in time to February, 1845, and that the holders who have allowed this period to pass have thereby lost their right to shares in the company. Mr. Romilly, Q.C., Mr. Rae, and Mr. Adams, were heard this morning for the defendants. Mr. BETHELL (with whom was Mr. Goldschmid) re plied for the plaintiff; contending on his part, that all that could be viewed by the Court as a contract, was that stipulation which appeared on the face of the loan note. The arguments having been finished, judgment was deferred. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Nov. 3. (Sittings in Banco.) WOOD V. WILLIAMS AND ANOTHER. The plaintiff is a cab owner, and the defendants linen drapers, carrying on business in Oxford-street. The action, which was tried in the last Trinity term before Lord Denman, was brought to recover damages for in juries inflicted on a cab belonging to the plaintiff by a cart driven by the servant of the defendant. The jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff. It appeared from the evidence ad duced at the trial that the cab was on a stand, and that the cart, which was driven by a man named - Phillips, came in collision with it, causing the injuries for which com pensation was sought. It came out, however, that the cart was only hired by the defendant from a person named Gamp, who employed his own driver, but on the day in question Phillips drove it, in the unavoidable absence of the driver; before doing so, pri soner Gamp cautioned him, that if he did so it would be at his own risk. The case had been twice tried, each time a verdict having bren returned for the plaintiff. Mr. KNOWLES to-day applied for a new trial, and contended that the verdict was fallacious, inasmuch as the cart was not driven by Phillips on the authority of the defendants. Lord DENMAN turned to his notes, and held that the evidence proved that on the day in question the man Phillips was acting as the servant of the defendants, as he had received directions from their foreman, named Collins, to drive the cart to a certain place. Looking at the whole of the evidence, he considered the verdict warranted by the evidence, and refused the application. WESTON v. POTTER. This case was tried at the last summer assizes at Ips wich, before the late Mr. Justice Williams, when a verdict was found for the plaintiff. Mr. O ' MALLEY moved for a new trial on the ground of misdirection. It appeared that in May, 1845, the plaintiff purchased a horse from the defendant for 281. The horse was ultimately attacked with lameness, which was supposed to resu l t f rom a " splint " in the fo re , leg of the horse, which existed at the time of the purchase. The defendant had given a written warranty to the plaintiff as to the soundness of the horse. The question, therefore, at the trial was, whether there was a breach of warranty or not. It was shown that the plaintiff had examined the horse before he made the purchase. One of the witnesses of the plaintiff said that the horse had no splint at the time, whilst all the others sa id th a t :it was distinctly visible in the fore leg. The Learned Judge thus put the case to the jury. If the horse had a splint at the time of the contract, and afterwards produced his lameness, then the warranty was incorrect and the contract void; whereas, he (Mr. O'Malley) contended that the "splint" turned into lameness in consequence of the improper treatment of the purchaser, and that the " splint" was well known at the time of the contract, and was, therefore, excluded from the terms of the warranty. Lord DENMAN took time to consider the application, and in order that he might have an opportunity of con sulting the late Mr. Justice Williams's notes. BAIL COURT, Nov. 3. (Sittings in Banco, before Mr. Justice PATTESON.) (Sittings at Nisi Prius.) PICKFORD AND OTHERS V. LACON. This was an action brought to recover the sum of 31. 45., the sum which the defendant had contracted to pay in consideration of three seats being reserved for him in the plaintiff's coach from Yarmouth to London. Mr. Watson, Q.C. (with whom was Mr. Archbold) appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Crowder and Mr. Montague Smith conducted the defence. Mr. WATSON stated the case briefly. The plaintiff was a clerk in the Customs at Newhaven, and in June, 1845, went to Norwich with his wife and servant. On the 16th of June in that year he sent to 'engage three places in the plaintiff's coach to London for the following day. They entered their places, but on the coach reach ing Yoxford he got out, saying that the coach was over loaded, and proceeded with his wife in a post chaise to London. On the coach arriving at London, application was made to Mr. Lacon for the money for the fare, but he refused to pay it. He stated that the coach was overloaded, but he was the only per son who seemed to entertain such un opinion, for his servant proceeded to London without expressing any desire to leave. His clients had been anxious to try the present case as cheaply as possible, and therefore would have brought it on before the Under-Sheriff ; but the Learned Judge was of opinion that the nature of the case rendered it desirable that it should be brought forward in one of the higher Courts. Mr. C. J. Powell proved the license of the coach, which contained the names of the proprietors. Mr. Cooke stated that, in 1845, he was book-keeper at the office at Yarmouth. Has seen all the plaintiffs there, and he has transacted business with them as pro prietors. On the 16th of June in that year the man servant of the defendant came and took three places— one inside and two out. Directions were given that the passengers were to be taken up at Mr. Lacon's, on the quay. A pound was paid down. There were twelve people outside the coach. Mr. MiNamara, a railway agent, proved that he was on the coach on the 17th of June. He got up at Lowes7 Upon this case being called on, which came before the Court upon the petition of Mr. Dyce Sombre, pray ing the supersedeas of the commission of lunacy that had been issued against him, Mr. ROLT stated that he bad been requested by Mr. Bothell, who was engaged in the Vice-Chancellor of England's Court, to request that it might stand over till to-morrow morning. . The LORD CHANCELLOR could not allow the case to stand over to the prejudice of the other business of the Court. He wished to know whether any proposition had been made, or was likely to be made, on the subject of the petition, or any arrangement come to among the parties ? Mr. BOLT was not aware of any proposition for an arrangement. The LORD CHANCELLOR thought it most desirable that some attempt should be made to come to some arrangement, as he thought it must be evident, from the report of the physicians, what course the Court would think it right to take unless some arrangement was come to. He thought the best course would be to let the case stand over for a few days, to see if counsel on both sides would not anticipate what the Court would do by coming to some arrangement. Mr. CALVERT was with Mr. Bethel], and was anxious to hear what suggestion the counsel on the other side would make. Mr. RoLT said that of course, if the case stood over, everything must remain in statu quo, and no further affidavits must be filed. The LORD CHA.NCELLOR—CertainIy. It is at my suggestion that the case stands over. I think the case had better stand over for a week to see if some arrange ment cannot be come to. Mr. BOLT hoped his Lordship would appoint a par ticular day for hearing the case. The LORD CHANCELLOR_. Let it stand for this day week. The COURT then proceeded to hear bankrupt petitions, but no case of any interest came before the Court previous to its rising. Mr. TURNER presented a petition from the Countess Zichy, praying the payment of arrears of certain life policies to which she laid claim. - From the statement of the Learned Counsel it ap peared that the Union Company of Assurance at Paris had agreed to pay the late Marquis of Hertford an an nuity of 22,750 francs, in half-yearly payments of 11,375 francs. In the codicil to the will of the Marquis of Hertford there appeared the following, viz. :—" There is a green box at Milan, with my name, containing letters from Naples, &c., which I leave, in case of my death, to Charlotte Stracklan, and desire that it may be given to her unopened." The codicil also bequeathed, after pay ing certain bequests, &c., all the goods, chattels, &c., of which the noble testator was pos sessed, to Charlotte Leopoldina, Countess de Zichy. On the 29th of March, 1843, the Master made his report on the administration suit of Hertford and Lowther, and found that the green box in question contained, among other things, a life annuity bond, dated Milan,, April 1, 1837. On the 4th of April an order of nisi was obtained for the purpose of confirming this report. Exceptions were then taken to certain Polish and Austrian bonds contained in the box, which exceptions were allowed. Several other legal steps were then had recourse to; and the object of the present petition was to ascertain whether the Countess was entitled to the amount cf the arrears due on the French policy at the testator's decease, as well as the arrear due on the Milan policy. After hearing the argutne , its on both sides in extenso, Lord LANGDALE went through the case in detail, and having expressed his opinion as to the impropriety of bringing forward the case at all, dismissed the petition with costs. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. CLERKENWELL. Yesterday, Thomas Lavender, a young man, who di scribed himself as a porter, was placed at the bar before Mr. Combe, charged by Miss Anna Jones, of 28, Salii bury •street, Islington, with having feloniously stoppisl her on the Queen's highway, put her in bodily fear, and stolen from her person a valuable silk shawl. The prosecutrix, whose face exhibited marks of vio lence, deposed that on Monday evening she went to a party, where she was detained until twelve o'clock. She had made an appointment to meet her mother at the Temperance-hall, South street, Islington, to proceed home with her, and as she was on her way the prisoner accosted her, saying, "It is a fine night," and he soli cited her to take his arm. She declined this invitation and walked on but he continued to follow her, and several times importuned her, but she hastened onwards much alarmed. He at length asked her to enter a pub lic house and have something to drink. She begged of him to desist, and go about his business, or she would give him in custody to a policeman. On her arrival at the corner of South-street, near Britannia-fields, the prisoner seized her, and told h er to open her shawl, when she call e d out " durder," " Police,' keeping ti g ht h o ld of her shawl. The prisoner then struck her a violent blow with his clenched fist on her mouth, which lacer ated her lips, loosened several of her teeth, one of which was knocked out, and, dragging the shawl from her shoulders, he ran oft' with it. She bled very much, and was nearly stunned, but she called out " Stop thief," and the prisoner was taken into custody. John James, of Miles-street, Icloxton, picked up the shawl near to the spot where the prisoner was taken into custody. James Hitchcock, 131 N, deposed that he heard the cries of " Murder," and " Police," in a female voice. He went towards the spot, and met the prisoner walk ing away. He said to witness,—" You are wanted at the corner." Witness went on, and found Miss Jones bleeding from the mouth. She pointed out the direction the prisoner took. Witness pursued and apprehended him. He said,—" I did not take the shawL" The prisoner was concealed near a hedge, opposite South street, when he took him. Miss Jones positively identified the prisoner. She knew nothing of him; she never saw him before in her life. Mr. COMBE cautioned the prisoner that it was a very serious charge against him, and he was not bound to say anything in his defence at present. Prisoner (indifferently) —I needn't say anything now. He was fully committed for trial. Ann Parker, a young woman, was placed at the bar charged with having attempted to murder her own mo ther by strangling her. Elizabeth Jennings deposed that the prisoner was a street-walker, and lodged in the same room with witness and her mother, wko was a washerwoman, at No. 5, Vernon's-buildings, St. Pancras -road. At 3 o'clock that morning the prisoner came home intoxicated. A quarrel ensued between the prisoner and her mo ther, when the prisoner seized her by the throat; they struggled together for some time, until the pri soner forced her mother down undermost on the bed, and held her until she was black in the face. Witness separated them, and the mother lay on the bed appa rently lifeless. Witness instantly sent for a surgeor, and called in a policeman, who took the prisoner into custody. A surgeon attended, and the mother was re stored to her senses. She said (meaning the prisoner), " She did it." (The witness gave her evidence with great reluctance, and was evidently desirous of conceal ing the truth.) Haines, 194 5, deposed, th a t at h a l f-past three o'clock he was called in, and he found the mother to all appear ance dead, lying on the bed. When she came a little to her senses he inquired who it was that offered the vio lence to her ? She replied, " She did it," meaning the prisoner. Witness took her into custody. The prisoner said several times, "I did it," and, making use of bad language and throats, exclaimed, " I will do it for all of them one after the other." He produced a certificate from the surgeon that " Henrietta Parker was lying in a dangerous state from the effects of violence by stra gulation." Mr. COMBE inquired of the witness Jennings whether the marks of violence upon the mother's neck were caused by the prisoner's hands ? Jennings—l can't say whether by the hands or strings of the petticoat. Mr. CO' BE asked the prisoner if she wished to say anything to the charge ? Prisoner (sullenly and indif ferently)—l came home and she was drunk. She began with me and struck me on the nose first. Mr. COMBE—Your mother's life is in danger. This is a serious charge against you. Perhaps she may die. I shall remand you until her fate is known. She was remanded. WANDS IV ORT H. Yesterday George Frost, a labourer, aged about 60, was finally examined upon a charge of attempting to murder his wife, by stabbing her in the arm with a table knife. It appeared from the evidence given on the previous day, that on Sunday afternoon last, about half -past three o'clock, the wife of the prisoner went to the residence of police.constable Pearce, 250 V, in the Bridgeway, Wim bledon, and exhibiting her right arm, which was stream ing with bl oo d, sa id her husband had stabbed her, and produced the knife with which he did it, a common table knife, the blade of which was smeared with blood. After the wound had been dressed by Mr. Tapley, a chymist, the prisoner was taken into custody and brought to Wandsworth station-house, where he admitted having committed the offence. The wife nor surgeon being pre sent, the prisoner was remanded. Yesterday the wife of the prisoner attended, and when called upon to give evidence said she had been married thirty-two years, that she was very hasty, and consi dered herself as much to blame as her husband. She thought it a hard thing to he obliged to swear against him. Mr. CLIVE observed that the witness must be sworn, but recommended her to be careful that the account she now gave did not vary too much from the statement she had made at the police-station on Sunday night. She deposed that on Sunday last they had both been par taking freely of beer; and had some high words. Her husband did not do any more to her than in attempting to pass him she found her arm cut, and went out, and, seeing a policeman, he took her to a doctor's to have it dressed. Mr. Edwin Fennell, surgeon, proved that the woman Frost had received a wound in the fleshy part of the arm, which had been inflicted by a knife; the instrument had passed completely through, but, fortunately, avoided the larger vessels. John Payne, 11 V, acting inspector at Wandsworth station, proved that the wife, when she made the charge, gave the following statement :--That she and her hus band had some words, and he said, " D —n you, I'll stab yo.t." He took a knife out of his pocket and opened the blade, but he did not stab her with that one, bat one from off the table. She then struggled with him, threw him down, and wrested the knife from him ; after which she wont for the police. The prisoner made answer that she had taken up a knife score, of times tt o him, and she replied s h e h a d never used i t. The pri soner then said, " I own I did it, but it was all through Jealousy._ The prisoner, whose defence was that he did not stab his wife intentionally, was then fully committed for trial upon the charge of cutting and wounding with intent to murder. The wife fainted on hearing the decision. RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS. MANCHESTER, NOVEMB ER 3. STOCK ExertArtoz. —The sales are—Birmingham and Oxford Junction, 6 p.' — Churnet ant Blythe, % c. dis.—Eastern Counties, 2 234—Ditto, York Extension, 1 9-16 p.—East Lancashire, 45j c. p.— Ditto, No. 2 (late Liverpool, Ormskirk, and Preston), 4% c. p. Glasgow and Dumfries, 15-16 dis.—Buddersfleld and Manchester Railway and Canal, 31 34 p.—Ditto, ditto, 3% p.—llitto, Thirds, 1% p. —Lancashire and North Yorkshire, 1 dis.—Leeds and Thirsk, dis.—Leeds, Dewsbury, and Manchester, 6% p.— London, Manches— ter, and Birmingham, Quarters (B), 711 p.—Manchester, Buxton, and Matlock, 1% c. p.—North British, Extension, 15-16 p.—North Staffordshire, 2% p.—Oldham Districts, 4 dis.— Oldham, Birken head, &c. ' 18s. (Vs.—Preston and Wyre, 34—Ditto, Hal ves (A) , 4% p.—Ditto, ditto (13), % c. p.—Sheilleld and Lincoln, 1 dis.—Shrews bury and Birntingliam, 1-16 p.—Shropshire Union Railway and Canal, 5.16 c. (IN.—South-Eastern and Dover, No. 4, % p.—West Sliding Union, 1% p.—Whartdale (late North-Eastern), 15-16 dis. LEEDS. NOVEMBER 3. Snick Excizallox.—The sale; are—Birmingham and Oxford Junc tion, G p.—East Lancashire, No. 1, New, 334 p.—Ditto, ditto, No. 2 (late Liverpool, Orniskirk, &c.), 4 p.—East Lincolnshire, 2s. Gd. dis. —Great Grimsby and Sheffield, Quarters, I% dis. — Buddersfteld and Manchester, W. Bs. Gd. p.— Ditto, Extensions, 225. Gd. p.—Leeds and Bradford, 44 p.—Leeds and Dewsbury, 6% p.—Ditto, Branches, 31. Ids. p.—Leeds and Thirsk, 3 dis.—Ditto, New, 2% die.—Manchester and Leeds, Extensions, 20s. p. — Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland, 21s. Gd. p.—North British, Half Shares, 6 p.—Ditto, Quar ter Shares (late Carlisle Branch), 51s. p.—Ditto, Extension (scrip),,. 21s. Gd. p.—North Staffordshire, 2p. —lVharfdale Junction, 19n. die.— York and Newcastle, Preference, 4% p. —York and North Mid land, Preference, 71. I Is. p.— Ambergate, Nottingham, and Boston. ss. p.—Glasgow and Dumfries, 19s. dis.--Leeds, Wakefield, and Mid land, 16s. dis.— Loudon and York, 16s. die. 'J.—Midland and Thirsk Junction, 20s. die.—North Western, 2s. 61. p.—Oxford, Witney, and Cheltenham, 20s. dis.—Sheffield, Rotherham, and Goole, 3s. Gd. dig. —west Riding Union, 3/. Ils. s.— York and Carlisle, 435, dis.-1 ork shire, and Glasgow Union, 425. die. AULL, NOVEMBER 3. yesterday. North Staffords have improved slightly , and all other te STOCK EXCIIANGE..-Our market to-day has varied very little from 74 8.-Ditto. New Quarters, scrip, 20s. 9d.-York Newcastle,an a d ti and West Riding), stocks maintain their value. The sales are-North British, :ar p :s e: ference, 41. Is. 3t1.-York and North Midland ( s E ti; i r s i t ste , 2/. 17s. 6d.- , Preference, 7% -Ambergate, Nottingham. I eeds and Bewsl4ury, Branches, 2% p, -East Lincolnshire, 225. 6d.-Leeds p.-North Western, 225.- Northßirmingham and Oxford Junction, -Manchester, Buxton, and Matlock, ap.-a ß s o t Lancashire,. 4 cash r... 4a. ...- ea Coast, 9s. -East Indian, 15s, 6,1„ p.-Shropsh . lre Union, dis W t iuditig EfiIItEIEIELD, NOVEMBER 3. are-Ambergate EXCKANCK.-Tho sates , Nottingham, and STOCK u S z t il a o ff n ols ;i hl - re, es 2l. 3s. E-. Boston, Gs. p.-East Lancashire, No. 2 (late Ormakirk, & c. ) , 4 p, orth Western, par-Sheffield and Lincoln Ex tension, and Sheffield, 5 dis.-Ditto, Extensio ns, 365. dis.- tension, 156 dis.- Manchester , Midland, and Grimsby, 20 s. 6d, dis, D O irtetaot, ocks YORK, NOVEMBER 3. STOCK Exc nastaz.-The sales are-Ambe rga t e, Nottingham, and. D, 1 dis.--.N r Boston, 2/. 145. Gd. p.-Manchester, Buxtol, Matlock, and Midland 3-Newcastle and Berwick, 32% -North British, Quarter Share% 3T, -Ditto, Extension, 11. 13s. 6d.-North Staffordshire, 456-North \Vesteni, 1/. 2s. 9d.-York and Newcastle, 42%-Ditto, New, 17% -Ditto, Preference, 4 p. -York and North Midland, Selby, 83- Ditto (East and West Riding Extension), Preference, 7% p. EDINBURGH, NOVEMBER 2. BrocK EXCIIANGE.-The sales are-Aberdeen, 18L-Airdrie and llathgate, 4/. 55.-Arbroeth and Forfar, 281.-Ditto, Half Shares, 151. 10s.-Ayr and Gallowry, 1/. 7s. 6d.-British and Irish Union, 21. 35.-Caledonian, 231. 10s.-Ditto, New, 21 . s s. 6d.-Caledonian and. r 6 th d. , - 2 D 3r un .- d E e as e taonfd lAlrfeb,rolal.this.367d/..-2.)Eidittnob, uNriceir,a2n4d/.-13aDthIngiadtee..., Dumbarton, 1/. 65.-Clydesdale Junction, 331, IN.-Direct North , a l I n . ‘1 13 1 3 ' e . hLeaiihnd, Northern, dGrluito u n i 19/. : e. 1812. 201. 5e.-Edinburgh 2 /..105.-Edinburgh and Glasgow, 75,. Ditto, Half Shares, 20/..--t e". Ditto, Q P u re a r e erel Ditto, Newport, 31 . 63 .-Edinburgh and Perth, 11 . 55.-. . 17s. -Glasgow and. Ayrshire, W.-Ditto, New Stock, 361 . -Ditto, Quarter Shares, 174 158.-Ditto, Halves, 71. 155.-G1 I4s 6 ' . d.-G.asgow and Dundee Junction 11. 13 1 asgow Dumfries and Carlisle, 11 , S. 9d.-Glasgow ar td. Garnitirk, 40 /.-Glasgow and Greenock, 161. lOs -Ditto, New Sty .)c, Si. 155.-Ditto, Preference, 8/.125. 6 . 2s. 6 d.-Great North of Scotland 11 d.-Great Western, 13 7/.-London and York, 1/. 17s 6d.--a e' . castle and Berwick, 32/.-North British, 37/. lOs * iw .-Ditto, Ha'ives, 17/. 5 s.-Ditto, Quarters, cum new, 41. IL-Ditto, New Quer ftere, saip, 1/. 133. 6 d. - Ditto, Fifths, 61. 105.- Scottish Centro) , 201. 10 s. -Ditto, New, 101. 155,-Scottish Midland, 131,-Scottish, Grand Junction, 10 s.-Stirling and Dunfermline, 11. Is. GLASGOW, NOVEMBSA 2. STOCK EXCHANGE. -The sales are-Aberdeen, IN-Cared onian, New, 475 . -Caledonian and Dumbartonshire, 265. 6d.-Durkl, ,e and Perth, New, 755. p.-East of Fife, 158. -East Indian Railwa y, 16s. -Edinburgh and Northern, Newport, 645.-Glasgow, Kinn arnock. and Ayr, 681.-Dltta, Halves, 71. 1 la.-Glasgow, Dumfrieq, a nd Car lisle, 335.-Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ardrossan, 31s. 6d.- E ,lasgow, Airdrie, and Monkland Junction, 325.-Great North of Scotia nd, 235. 6d.-Great Western of Bengal, 95.-Madras, Nellore, and A soot, as. 3d.-North British, New Quarters, scrip, 335. 6d.-Scottiq . Central, 2036 -WWl:tern Junction. 595.