The Sun. — London, England, 1841-12-14 00:00:00

MORNING SUN LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, Dec. 13. ALLEN V. BIACPHERSON AND OTHERS. His Lordship was occupied during the morning with hearing the further arguments in this appeal, which had been aln-ady before the Court on Saturday. It appeared that a will had been made, which contained a codicil, with a bequest in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant, however, had, it was alleged, created an un favourable impression in the mind of the testator as to the plaintiff's character by false representations ; and the result was, that the bequest was cancelled. The de fendant, it eras said, could not, under those circumstances, be benefited by his own fraud, and the plaintiff was en titled to redress from the Court. It was contended, on the other hand, for the defendant, that as the matter re lated to the validity of a will in a personal estate, the Ecclesiastical Courts alone could take cognizance of it ; and the Court of Chancery had no right to interfere in such a case. This was the point at issue ; and his Lord ship having stated that he considered it one of great dif ficulty and importance, reserved his judgment till a future day. ROLLS COURT, Dec. 13. ALLEN AND OTHERS V. BONE AND OTHERS. This was a motion to dismiss the bill that had been filed in this suit with costs, on the ground that it had been filed without the knowledge and consent of the plaintiffs. The case was partly heard on Saturday. The bill was filed on Feb. 23, 1841, by Messrs. Hulme and Andrew, in the names of the plaintiffs, to recover possession of certain property devised to Richard Tho mas, by the will of a gentleman named Bridge, being one-fourth of the residue of his property, and consisting of several dilapidated cottages, situated at St. Helen's, Lancashire. This share of the property had been mort gaged by Thomas for 501., to a gentleman named Jones, who died on the sth December, 1830, having by his will bequeathed his property to his wife, who also died, having by her will, made in 1838, bequeathed it to three of the plaintiffs, and appointed them her executors The mortgage not having been redeemed; a bill for forelosure and sale was filed in the names of plaintiffs against no less than twenty defendants. The answer had been put in but various proceedings were taken in the suit, whereby costs had been incurred to the amount of 1261. 95. The plaintiffs now le d tat they had authorised the suit, and prayed t' at ' a b might be dismissed with costs, to be paid by Isti stiffs, and for a reference to the Master to tax t.se costs of the defendants respectively which had not been already taxed, and that Messrs Hultne and Andrew, the solicitors, by whom the bill was filed without the authority of the plaintiffs, might be. ordered to pay the same to the defendants respectively. Mr. Pemberton . and Mr. Cochrane appeared in support of the motion, and Yr. Kindersley and Mr. Glass against it. nAMSBOTTOM U. FREEMAN. Mr. PEMBERTON moved for an order to appoint a re ceiver of the rents of a leasehold estate belonging to the defendant, on which the plaintiffs, who are wholesale brewers, claimed to have an equitable mortgage. The defendant, who is a beer-shop keeper, having been in debted to the plaintiffs, gave them a confession of judg ment to be exercised unless the debt was paid within a given period. But the day before that on which pay ment became due, he executed an under-lease of the property at a nominal rent., upon which a bill was filed and an injunction obtained to restrain the defendant from receiving the rents. Defendant had not moved to dissolve the injunction, and the plaintiff now moved to have a receiver appointed. —Order granted. VICE CHANCELLORS' COURT, Dec. 13. (Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.) FLETCIIER V. NORTIICOTE. The arguments in this case were brought to a conclu sion this morning ; and the report was ordered to be referred back to the Master in the matter of the excep tions allowed. THE FISHMONGERS' COMPANY V. THE LORDS OF THE of Lieut. Dennehy were well founded, and that Mr. Thomas was not lit to commend a transport. Now, it was clear that the charge of the defendant in the present case was one of those privileged communica tions, which, even if the words were slanderous, would protect him from an action of damages. He had no other course to pursue—he was bound to report what he honestly and sincerely believed to be the inefficiency of the Master ; and there could be no objection taken to the manner in which that report was made. The Jury were now called to award damages against an officer in her Majesty's service for having discharged what:he conscientiously believed to be his duty. He confessed that he was astonished at such a case being brought into that Court. He submitted that, upon the plaintiff's own showing, the inquiry had been instituted in a regular manner, and he had in addition the report of the disin terested officers appointed by the Government in his fa vour ; and, under these circumstances, he submitted that the defendant was entitled to their verdict. Mr. Justice WIGIITMAN left it to the Jury to say whether they were of opinion that the defendant had exceeded the strict line of his duty in the representations he had made, and had been actuated by malice. The Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Da mages, 501. ALEXANDER V. TIIO3IAR. Mr. PRICE stated the case. It was an action brought by the plaintiff for injury sustained by himself, and his gig and horse, from a collision with the defendant's cart, on London-bridge, and which was attributable to the furious and reckless driving of the defendant's servant. Patrick Mahoney said, I sell combs and other small articles on London-bridge. On the sth May last, I saw a gig and horse coming from London towards the Borough ; it was on the proper side, and about two or three feet from the curb-stone. The horse was going about twelve miles an hour—he was not gallop;ng. I saw a cart on the right-hand side of the road, and drove over to the other side' against the gig, and chucked the man out of the gig. He fell against the curb-stone. He was in a very bad state, and was taken to the hospital. Cross-examined--I was on the Borough side of the bridge, on the footpath. Mr. Alexander was not stand ing up in the gig, nor whipping his horse. I don't know what the speed was. The man was driving fair enough. He was not more than between two and three feet from the kerb when the gig was struck. The cart drove away, but was stopped. The gig was broken all to pieces. William Storey--I am a Pity policeman. I was on duty on London-bridge on the sth May last. I saw Mr. Alexander picked up by two men ; his head was cut open. The gig was about a foot from the berb ; the shafts, springs, and body of the chaise were broken. I did not see the collision. The cart was standing behind the gig when I came up. I assisted in taking Mr. Alex ander to. the hospital. It was Mr. Thomas's servant who was driving the cart. Mr. Thomas is a wine-mer chant. He sent for myeslf and my brother officer after the accident, and inquired how it occurred, but we re fused to give any information. These are the orders given to the police force. Richard Varney—l was assisting a truck over London bridge on the day in question. I was behind the gig, which was going between three and four miles an hour. The cart was going between five and six miles an hour. I saw the cart strike the chaise about the step. The evidence of this witness and of Thomas Ihll, a person who was crossing the bridge at the time, was corrobora tive of what had been previously stated. The medical man who attended plaintiff for about a week after the accident, was then examined. His charge would be about 255. or 30s. The party who purchased the gig after the accident said he had given 50s. for it. It was in very shattered state, and when sound it might have been worth about 251. Mr. PLATT addressed the Jury for the defendant, and commented upon the statements made by the two police men, that they had instructions not to disclose what they knew of the transaction to any person until they had been brought into a court of justice. He did not think that any such improper and unjustifiable orders had been is sued, because it gave rise to much litigation. The defen dant having heard nothing of the accident but what was stated to him by his own servant, naturally sent for po licemen, to hear their version of the story, and to make pro per recompense to the plaintiff, if he found that his servant was in the wrong; but they would give him no informa tion, and hence arose the present action. The defendant's servant, Wyatt, who was driving the cart on the day in question, deposed that he was drivin g at a foot pace—that there was plenty of room f or t he plaintiff to pass —that the plaintiff was flogging his horse, and ran right against the cart which at the time was standing still. The cart was not at all injured; there were two sacks of malt in the cart at the time, and he had gone the third cart out of the line to pass others which had stopped. He had no whip, his master not allowing him to go beyond a foot pace. The gig was coming very fast, and crossed over towards his side of the road. Two or three other witnesses were examined, who stated that the plaintiff was driving very furiously, and that he had plenty of room to pass on his own side of the road without coming in contact with the cart. Mr. PRICE having replied, The Jury retired, and in half an hour returned with a verdict for the defendant. COURT OF EXC.HEQUER, Dec. 13. SHEPPARD V. SHOOLBRED AND OTHERS. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, the plaintiffs in this case were probably_ the largest woollen c l o th manufactu rers in England. They sought to recover 8162, the value of 39 pieces of cloth, which they alleged was their pro perty at the time they came into the possession of the de fendants, who kept a large shop for the sale of goods of all descriptions, in Tottenham-court-road. The amount in question was a large one, but the principle involved in the action was a hundred, nay, he might say a thousand, times more important. Ever since the Usury Laws had been repealed—for repealed they virtually had been—a practice had grown up, of traders who were in distressed circumstances getting bills discounted at ruinously high rates, and upon the deposit of goods as security. In Sept. 1840, a person named Green applied at the ware house of the plaintiffs fora quantity of cloths, which he said were wanted for the American market. and he wanted to send them by the Great Western, which sailed from Bristol in a few days. He gave references, which were satisfactory, and the goods were made up and sent in to his warehouse. The very next day the goods left that warehouse, but not for Bristol, or to any one to pack them for that destination, but to the shop of a Mr. At tenbury, a pawnbroker, where they were pl e d ge d f or one half their value, and for a bill which was discounted at ten per cent., and one per cent. upon the transaction. Now, it must be well known to every man in business, that any person transacting business on such terms must be on the high road to ruin, awl be acting disho nestly. The goods were then at t' MO bury's, and it would be proved that Mr. Brow n , aI $ S ter in the house of the defendant, went to the pawilaroker's shop to look at them, to see if he would purchase them, and on the 27th November he did purchase them for 5751., the cost of them having been 8161. odd, and they said they had paid for them. Now, he said the defendant, acting in that manner, not going to any regular place of busi ness, but going to a place the circumstan ces o f th e goods being ther e being likely to create suspicion, deserved no sympathy from the Jury. Such a transaction was not calculated to uphold the high charac ter of a London merchant. It would be proved that the goods were sold at such ruinous prices as must have ex cited suspicion, and he trusted the Jury would not lend themselves to such a transaction, but find for the plaintiff, in whom was still the property in the goods. The sale of the goods to Green upon the representation of their being for the American market was proved by Mr. Norton, the servant of the plaintiff. The goods were sold to be paid in cash on the Saturday week following. They were not paid for, and Green became bankrupt in five weeks after. The delivery of the goods and their removal to Atten bury's were proved by the waggoner. The examination of Mr. Brown before the Commis sioners of Bankrupts was put in, from which it appeared they had purchased the goods through, and from, a person named Ridgway; they were nearly all sold to Storey, a draper, of Tottenham -court-road. It was the only tran saction they had ever had with Ridgway. Stephen Stevens was porter and warehouseman to Green. The goods received from Sheppard were all sent away on the following day. Cross-examined—Was twelve months in his employ. During that period Green carried on a very large busi ness. Green told him to deliver the goods to Ridgway. He did so, and he took them away. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL called for the clothworkers' book, kept by the defendant. It was produced, and being compared with the invoice, the numbers corre sponded. Roger Dawson, a draper, of Newgate-street, proved the reasonableness of the prices charged in the invoice from Sheppard to Green. The goods there referred to could not be made for 57 51 and if a stranger were to offer them at such prices, and the goods were lay -1 a, aase „ 4 lAwnbroker's shop, he would d ec idedly refuse to Cross puren th em. exa mined —Good s in their trade were frequent y was happy t o depreciat e d to the buy ch'eap when he cou ld. mount of 30 per cent. Of course he Mr. TIIESIGER submitted that there was no case to go to the Jury. His LORDSHIP s a id he would not withdraw the case from the Jury—if he Was in the bo x h e wou ld k now what to do. The ATTORNEY-G EN ... pla i nt i f f' s case ? E n" -- -Is your Lordship adverse to Lord point of law ; but I do not O h r e d ABLNGER—Not in think you have at all connected the the Jury for the defendants with the fraud committed by Green. Mr. THESIGER then addressed de fendants. foun His LO erdict for the de fenRDSHIP, summed updants. , and the Jury immedi a t e l y Counsel for the plaintiff, the Attorney-Gentral, Mr. Kelly, and Mr. Martin ; for the defendants, Mr. The siger, Mr. Erie, Mr. Hill, and Mr. Humfrey. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Dec. 13. JACKSON V. BOWLEY. This action was brought by the churchwardens on behalf of the united parishes of St. Mary Walbrook, an d St. Bennet Shirehog, in the:City of London, to recover from the defendant, as executor of Joseph Lyon, de ceased, formerly parish clerk and rate collector of those parishes, the snm of 21/. Bs. Id., which the testator had received on account of the rates, and had not paid over to the churchwardens. The defendant pleaded that he had duly administered the assets, and had no funds wherewith to discharge tko debt. The plaintiffs set forth in their replication, that the plaintiff had left, property of several kinds, which had come i n t o t h e h an d s of the executor, an d had not been administered. It appeared that the defendant was brother-in-law of the testator, having married two of his sisters, by both of whom there were children ; and the testator having no children of his own, and being separated from his wife, assigned to the defendant, in trust for the eldest daughter of the latter, leasehold property producing about 254 a-year, and subseouently assigned to him a mortgage deed and collateral securities of the value of 1,5001. in trust for the remaining children of the testa tor's two sisters. lie died in a few months after the exe cution of these assignments, leaving a will, to which de • fendant was executor, and by which he bequeathed free hold property in Brighton, and the sum of 5001., to his widow. The defendant administered, and having sworn the effects to be under 8001., paid the duty of 151. Ac cording, however, to his case, in answer to the present ac tion, the property realized only 91/., and he expended 89/, in the probate duty, funeral expenses, and the pay ment of certain debts. But it was endeavoured to be shown for the plaintiffs that the property, independent of that assigned to the defendant in trust for his children, really amounted to nearly the sum sworn for which the duty was paid. The case occupied from shortly after ten o'clock in the morning to half-past six in the evening, when the Jury found for the plaintiffs in the full amount. In answer to the Judge, the Jury replied that they did not find the assignments to be fraudulent. Did you enter those in your books 2—No ; we kept a list of them, as we did also with the linens. Where is that list?—l don't know where either of the lists are. When did you see it last P—l don't recollect. State as nearly as you can ?—Late in July, or early in August.. Where were you when You last saw that—in your country house?—l don't recollect. I should think it was. Was it amongst the documents you destroyed ?—lt was not, nor were any papers of accounts ever destroyed by me. Did not you yourself remove some of the goods in your own phieton to some of the places of deposit ?—I believe I did.. Don't you_ know that you did ?--y es . State the-number of plaoes taiwhich, according to your knowledge or belief, the goods which were so removed were carried to ?—Four, I think. To whose honses did they go ?—My own, Mr. Hay ward's, Mr. Bendell's, and Mr. Churchouse's. Those are all that I recollect. They were moved subsequently from those houses to other places. Were not goOdS removed to. Mrs. Reynolds's, a rela tive of your wife ?=---They were--from Mr. Bendell's to Mrs. Reynolds's, and were removed from Mrs. Reynolds's to my house in Regent-street, in my cart. When ?—I do not recollect. Will you swear that all the goods that were removed unti - you should determine what should be done with the oi 'ere removed back toyour house in Regent-street? —No ; but I will swear it was intended to do so. The messenger's man states that on the evening of the 12th October, this fiat being issued 16th September preceding, he seized stock, consisting of seven packages, belonging to you at Mr. Layer's, of Princes's-place, Kennington-cross. Do you not believe that the pro perty to which the messenger has so sworn belonged to your estate ?—The Bankrupt—l should like to hear the messenger's evidence read. The evidence of John Fleet, the messenger, having been read, The Bankrupt—l do not wish to let that word seizure pass' unnoticed, for I have evidence to show that it was not seized. Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD—That has nothing to do with the question ; do you believe those goo& belonged to your estate?—l believe that such property belonged to my estate, and also the linens, they both being sent out for the same purpose. Were you not examined on 6th October last, under this fiat?—l think I was. Did you not then swear that you never sent any goods to any body, except to Mr. Cook and Mr. C. Leaf ?—I did not ; I swore on thattlay— Mr. Commissioner HOcaoyn—lt would be much better to put in the examination, and ask him if what he had there stated was true. The examination of the 6th of October having been put in, the bankrupt said, I swore on that (lay that I did not send any goods for any one, except for Cook and Chris topher Leaf. On the suggestion of Mr. Commissioner lIOLROYD, the following question and answer for your examination of the 6th of October being read to you in the following words Have you sent any other goods to anybody besides Mr. Cook and Mr. C. Leaf ?—None other. How do you reconcile what you then swore with what you now swear ?—The goods that were sent out were sent out for Messrs. Cook and Gladstone, and for C. Leaf and Co., and when the examination was read over to me, I think by Mr. Jones, then Messrs. Cook's solicitor, I understood the words to be for Messrs. Cook and Gladstone, and mentioned it at the time, having made the following observation to Mr. Jones, and remarked at the time, that I wished to be par ticular in answer to that question. I understood from Mr. Jones that the word " for" in the question was inserted in my examination previous to my signature, and not the word " to," and I believe that my trade as signees present will remember it, and that they both observed that Mr. Jones shielded or threw a cloak over those parts of my answers, for the purpose of shielding his clients Messrs. Cook and Gladstone. Mr. C. Brown and Mr. Llewellyn are the gentlemen I refer to in this answer. They have informed me that they had re moved Mr. Jones from being solicitor to the fiat in consequence. This I conceive to be a proper explanation. Is it a true explanation, and one with which your mind and conscience goes now ?—Certainly. You adhere to that answer ?—Yes. Did you then disclose to Mr. Jones, or your assignees, where the goods which were then concealed were ?—No. What was your reason for swearing in relation to them, and not stating the fact that they were concealed at Laver's ?—Mr. Jones did not ask me. Were you not then asked if you had never sent any goods to any person but to Leaf, and did you not answer " Yes, a parcel of goods returned to Cook, Son, and Gladstone ?"—I do not recollect that question or answer. Were you not then asked had you ever sent any goods to any excess ? (The officer of the Court read the bankrupt's examination of the 6th of October, from which it appeared that such a question had been put, and such an answer given.) That having been read to you, I ask how came you not to disclose where these goods then were P—The parcel of goods at that moment had been entered as a return to Messrs. Cook, Son, and Gladstone, and dated back in our books. Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD—Why did you not state at that moment that these goods were at Laver's?—Be cause Messrs. Cook and Gladstone could not have reaped any benefit from them, and I was instructed by them. When and by whom?—Messrs. Cook and Gladstone had previously told me they would give me 2,5001. if I got them out, and that was my reason for swearing as I did, which I thought consistent with truth, and think so now. Will you now swear that there goods were not intended to be concealed from your cre liters, except from Cook and Gladstone ?—Yes ; I swear so now. Did you not meet your shopman, Churchouse, on the morning after seizure by the messenger, and did you not say to him, speaking of the seizure, " Who could have given the information," or words to that effect ?—I do not think I did. I met him near the Court of Bank ruptcy. I had not seen him previously, nor do I recol lect ever saying anything to him of the kind. Will you swear you did not ?—I will not. What is your belief?—l believe I did not. If he has sworn on that same day that you did put that question to him, has he sworn to your belief that which is true or false ?—I have no recollection of such a thing, but I cannot answer for what he has sworn. I might have said such a thing, but I do not recollect it. .1 see no reason why I should not. You have sworn that You did not intend to conceal attase goods from your creditors ; would not - that question, if you had put it, intimate that you meant to conceal them P—l (lid not intend that all my assignees should have the information. Then, did you intend, by the answer, that your two assignees, Brown and Llewelly, should known?—No, only Mr. Cook. How do you reconcile your last answer with the state ment you have just now given, that the goods which were seized were not intended to be concealed from your creditors ?—lt appears to me that they do tally with each other. I wish here to make an addition to my answer. about Churchouse. On the morning of the 13th (the day re ferred to) I do not recollect to have seen Mr. Churchouse anywhere alone, and only in the Court of Bankruptcy, in the presence of other persons, in a private room, and therefore I think that I could not have made such an ob servation to him as the one referred to in your previous question. Did you make such an observation to him, either on the morning of the 13th, or at any other time ?—I do not recollect ever having done so. Will you now swear you did not ?—No. The Bankrupt—May I request to know, Sir, if there are not in my examination many questions appearing to which no answers appear? I draw your Honour's atten tion to this to show how very loosely that examination was conducted. TUE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 14, 1841, The goods were afterwards fetched away late at night, in t a cab or coach, by Mr. Hayward, who met me at St. John's Wood Chapel. They were then taken from the coach and placed in my phaeton, and I drove them to Mr. Hayward's. The next day, or, the next but one, Mr. Hayward and myself got up the goods for sale, and sent them to Regent-street. They were not taken out of the cab, but were taken from Regent-street to the warehouse of Christopher Leaf and Co., having first been entered and regularly invoiced. Mr. Leaf sold the goods for a much better price to wholesale houses in the trade, and the proceeds were received in Regent-street, and accounted for there in the usual way. A small por tion of the goods we never got from Slioolbred and Co., as they stated they had sold them. A very small allow ance was made by them for such goods, and deducted from the 3041. That, I believe contains the substance of Mr. Walden's matter. For what purpose were these goods originally place( with Walden ?—They were sent there by me and in tended afterwards to be sent to Messrs. Cook and Glad stone. When did you form that intention ?—When I sent oul the goods, as before. You have no hesitation in affirming that ?—Not an, What was the amount of the whole of the goods sent Walden, and ultimately sold by C.. Leaf ?--The amount of the goods sent out by C. Leaf was, I think, 6501. I cannot tell exactly without referring to my books. Do you mean that that was the whole amount of goods sold by C. Leaf for you ?—No. What was the whole amount of goods that C. Leaf sold for you ?—About 2,7001. or 2,800/. The other portion of goods alluded to as being sent away from Walden's on the Monday morning, was taken to my private residence, and in a day or two were removed to Mr. Laver's, and have since been given up to the messenger. Were not the goods you speak of as removed to Laver's other goods than those which were sold for 2,7001. or 2,8001. to C. Leaf ?—I believe so ; they formed part of the goods delivered to the messenger on the 12th. The goods sold by C._Leaf did not produce 2,7001. ; that was the cost price. What was the amount, in value at cost price, of all the goods removed from your premises, of which mention has been made in the examination ?—The goods sent to C. Leaf and Co., at cost price, but not in value, was about 2,7501. The amount of goods at Laver and Reynold's was 1,870 L Were these the only goods to your knowledge or belief that were removed from your premises ?—No. A parcel of linen was sent out under the plea of being washed, amounting to about 700/., and a small portion of goods not recovered from Shoolbred and Cook. These com prise all the goods that I have ever sent or ordered to be sent out. Do they comprise all that you believe to haie been sent out ?—Yes. Do you now swear, to the best of your knowledge and belief, that that is the whole of your estate, stock, goods, and effects, you have disclosed to your assigness under the fiat?-Yes. Where is the letter that you say Hayward wrote to you giving you information that Walden was selling your goods ?—I did not keep it, believing it of no consequence. What did you do with it? I do not recollect ; I think it likely I destroyed it instantly. What makes you state it likely you destroyed it ? As I was coming to town instantly to see to it, thoug the letter was useless. Do you now remember that you then so thought ? —Yes. It was never my habit to keep useless letters. I don't recollect whether I destroyed the letter, the letter being entirely useless, and do not think it is likely that I thought of keeping it. I have no doubt that I destroyed it, but I don't recollect about it. I can give you the contents, if you wish it. It was as follows : " Dear Sir, I have just heard that Walden has been selling or offering silks ; bad you better not come to town instantly ?" I think it was dated about hall-past five o'clock, Regent -street. I received it in the Isle of Wight on Sunday morning. When I received it I lodged at Moore's library or Hewitt's baths. Each of these parties had lodging rooms. I don't recollect at which place I received it ; but it will be easily proved. My family stopped there till the Ist week of September. Ido not enter my travelling expenses in any book. I usually draw a cheque for them. I do not think I received any letter from Hayward or any other person in my establishment while I was at the Isle of Wight. I am confident I did not. On one occasion I recollect receiving a letter from my clerk, stating that he had forwarded me the letters that had been received in Regent-street, and that they were going on as usual. I am not certain that the letter did not allude to the tak ings of the day, but that was nothing important. lam speaking now of the month of August, or the beginnibg of September. I don't recollect whether the letter re lated to the takings. I had been dishonouring my bills for the month of July preceding. The takings were of great importance to me at the latter end of August and the beginning of September; but not the takings of one day. I have no doubt that I destroyed the letter. I have been to the official assignee to search for one letter. I have not been in the habit of keeping my letters generally. At four o'clock the examination of the bankrupt was adjourned till to-morrow (this day) at eleven o'clock. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT, Dec. 13. IIPRE JOHN CLARK SUMMERS. The insolvent, who was more than seventy-six years of age, was opposed by Mr. Nicholls, on behalf of Messrs. Manton and Steele. He was supported by Mr. Cooke. The debts which appeared ini his schedule amounted to upwards of 6,3561., the greater number of which were without consideration, and • upwards of 5,3001 were accommodation bills in favour of Peter Harriss Abbott, the late official assignee' in the Bankruptcy Court, who had absconded a defaulter. It appeared by the insolvent's testimony that he had, as a matter of friendship towards Abbott, accepted, at different times, bills to the amount of 30,0001. in his favour, one of which for 3501. passed into the hands of Messrs. Manton and Steele, and formed the grounds of the present opposition. The insolvent had been many years in business, and eventually retired on an income which he trusted would have been sufficient to maintain him through life, but the present unfortunate transaction frustrated his hopes, and he had given it up to pay his creditors. The Learned CHIEF CO3IMISSIONER, who sat for the first time after his return from Circuit, said that, al thOugh the insolvent did not evince any evldedce of dis honesty at first, yet he had been guilty of running into debt, without any reasonable hope of. having the means of payment. The sentence of the Court, therefore, was, that he be imprisoned for five calendar months from the date of his vesting order. TREASURY. This was a petition to confirm the Master's report ; and the question at issue was whether, under the provi sionS of various Acts of Parliament, the Company, who were the trustees for a charity, were entitled to the costs of re-investment in respect to the amount of certain lllCS suages situate in Thames-street, which had been pur chased by the Lords of the Treasury for the purpose of erecting on their site the new Custom House. The case was merely opened to-day. and the further .arguments were ordered to be heard to-morrow. (Before Vic::-Chancellor WIGRAM.) MEUX V. BELL. This was a bill of interpleader_filed by Sir Henry Meux and his partners. The case has already been heard before the Vice• Chancellor of England, from whom it was appealed to Lord Cottenham. The question in dispute was the title to a bond securing to Mrs. Jordan the sum of 8,000/. before her marriage. The husband of the lady, for whose benefit it was executed, borrowed of Mr. Bell the sum of 7,000/. upon the security of the bond. Mr. Jordan become embarrassed in his circumstances and absconded, and Mr. Bell sought to obtain payment of- the 7,0001. by means of the bond. Lord Cottenham directed an inquiry before the Master, to ascertain who was entitled to the bond, and the money secured thereon, on the 23d of July, 1835; and the proceedings in the Master's office were read at great length to the Court. The cause came before the Court on further directions. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Dec. 13. (Sittings at Guildhall, before Mr. Justice W. touTmAw and a Common Juy. SLANDER.—THOMAS V. DEIs.INEnY. Mr. PLATT (with whom was Mr. Ball) stated the case. It - was an action fur slanderous words used by the de fendant of the plaintiff, and calculated to injure him in hid business and character. The plaintiff was master of the Sovereign transport, which had been chartered by the Admiralty in the month of June last, to convey Go vernment stores from England to Malta. The de fendant, Lieutenant Dennehy, was the Government agent put on board the vessel to take charge of the stores, and the slanderous words were used by the defendant during the voyage, and on the return of the ves se l t o E ng l an d, and ascribed to the plaintiff negligent and improper con duct, bylwhich the vessel was endangered, and on three several occasions had been nearly ashore. The result of these charges was, that the plaintiff had been removed by the owners from the command of the Sovereign, and had lost the advantages which he would have derived from being employed. The Learned Counsel contended that the defendant had most unreasonably and impro perly insisted on having the command of the vessel— that he was actuated by malicious motives—that the charges were wholly unfounded, and that he was enti tled to heavy damages for the injury he had sustained. Mr. Soames, one of the owners of the vessel, was examined as to the statements made by the defendant to him regarding the conduct of the master on the voyage to Malta and back. The defendant, who was .a Lieute nant in the Navy, went out as super-cargo, and to look after the Government stores. The vessel left Deptford in the month of June last and re turned in Ndvember. It was on the return of the vessel that Lieutenant Dennehy reported to him that the vessel had nearly gone down, and he ascribed that to the mis conduct and ignorance of the plaintiff. The first occasion was when the vesssel was near Hastings ; the second was when she was in the Mediter ranean ; and the third was when she was off the coast of Spain. The witness added, "In consequence of the statements made to me by Mr. Dennehy I discharged the plaintiff. The defendant told me that Thoma s was totally unfit to command the vessel. She was nearly 400 tons burden. Previously to hearing the statement of Lieutenant Dennehy I had determined, in consequenc e of a letter received from the defendant, to discharge the plaintiff. I believe the plain tiff has not since been employed. The defendant complained that the plaintiff did not obey his orders. I think the loss he would sustain for not having gone the voyage would be 151 per mont h . The vessel brought home troops from Malta. In consequence of the repre sentations made to me by Lieutenant Dennehy, I dis charged the plaintiff. Mr. Th omas admitted that the vessel was nearly on shore off Worthing. I have com manded a ship fur nine years, and think it would de pend upon circumstances whether a stream anchor should b e got out or not. Lieutenant Dennehy said an anchor should have be©n se nt out, and Mr. Thomas said it was not necessary. I h eard that the vessel was nearly on the rocks r offCape B reton Point, in the bay of Gibraltar. Mr, Thomas denied thatt wassbe was in the position. Lieut. Dennehy said ther e was a con stant disobedience to his orders on . the voyage. i the opinion of Captain Sheriff and Lieut. W entworth, from the statement of Lieut. Dennehy, that Mr. Thomas was unfit to command the vessel. I don't know how long the inquiry lasted. The pilot and chief mate were examined, and put Mr. Thomas on board the Asia, but did not send him on the voyage, as I (lid not think him fit t o command a vessel to India. My partner, Mr. Lus _ cornbe, told me that Lieut. Dennehy had recommended Thomas as captain of another of our vessels, a schooner called the Valley, bound for New Zealand, and he also told me that Lieut. Dennehy expressed his sorrow for what he had done. Li eu t. Dennehy is the Govern ment agent for transports, and it is his business has no see that the mast e r does his duty, but he no right to interfere with the navigation of the vessel. _ The deposition of Staff As s i s t an t-Surgeon Michael APBride was then put in and read. It appeared that he was a passenger in the Sovereign from Malta to England. They sailed on the sth October, with about 100 soldiers, 35 women, and 80 children. He heard the defendant repeatedly tell the plaintiff that he would report him, and take care that he should never command a vessel again. The witness thought the plaintiff did every thin g he could to keep the vessel out of danger. He heard the defendant frequently say that he would report the plaintiff—that he would put a spoke in his wheel, and that he would do for him. There was no complaint from any ether party. The plaintiff and de fendant had several differences of opinion about the navigation of the vessel. The defendant applied to wit ness to ask Captain Warburton and his wif e t o mess with them, and thereby exclude the plaintiff, who was not m a r fit person to be associated with. addressed the Jury for the de fendae. tilEtBl°En appeared that Lieutenant Dennehy had been put on board the vessel by the Government te perform a angst important . and onerous duty, and had a right authority to give him orders as to . . the navigation and course of the vessel whenever there appeared to • him any danew. Lieut. Dennehy was clearly the supe r i or • d - in command on board tnat vessel, and it was of th e greatest importance th a t th ere should be due subordination and obedience by every per son on board. He thought an action for slander under such circumstances was most . . unjustifiable and improper. Lieut. Dennehy, as u in di d ci u o t Lbo co und, reported . what . he be lieved to be the inj n duct and inefficiency of the plaintiff to the Admi ra l ty. It was his duty to the service to do so, and the Admiralty having ordered an investigation, the result was, that Captain Sheriff, Superintendent of the Dock -yard, and Lieut. Wentworth who had no interest whatever in the matter, inquired into the matter, and were of opinion that the charges THE SAME V. THE SAME. This was another action by the churchwardens to re cover a further sum of 311, in which a verdict was taken for the plaintiffs by consent, with the understanding that the defendant should have time to get in assets to meet the damages and costs. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Dec. 13. IN THE MATTER OF WM. lIITCHCOCK, A BANKRUPT. The adjourned examination of this bankrupt, whom our readers will recollect carried on business as a draper in Regent-sereet, was resumed to-day. The examina tion appears to excite a great deal of interest among the creditors, as long before the hour appointed (eleven o'clock) the Commissioner's room was crowded to excess. Shortly after eleven o'clock Mr. Commissioner Holroyd took his seat, and the examination was then proceeded with by Mr. Ashurst, in the following manner : Have any other facts relating to your dealings and transactions with Messrs. Cook and Gladstone occurred to you since your last examination ?—None that I con sider of importance. Then may the Court consider that You have now stated the substance—in fact, the whole of the facts and conversations between them, or either of them, and your self ?—I think not. Will you state, then, what matter of substance you have not yet stated ?—The whole of the conversation which took place in the drawing-room in Regent-street, between myself and Mr. Cook, I think has not been given. You mean you have not given it ?—I presume I have no right to ask for the evidence I have given with re spect to the meeting, but I forget whether the conver sation with respect to the goods was here given ; if I have not given it, I will give it now., Mr. AsnunsT—lf you well tell me what you are going to state, I will tell you whether it is here or not. The Bankrupt—When Mr. Cook and I met at the drawing-room we had a conversation, not only about,the goods, but also about a plan for getting them out. In addition to the conversation about I3uzzacot's security I told them of a plan for getting them out. Will you adhere to what you stated with respect to that on a former examination ?—I said that the plan for getting them out was working very well, and that in a few days I hoped to have completed the amount; and that was, Mr. Buzzacot's security and my brother's moiety of 7,0001. would make up the deficiency in their debt of 19,0001. Mr. Cook then cautioned me. Tell me what Mr. Cook said?—Mr. Cook said that he understood sufficiently, and they had every confidence in me to complete the arrangement. This is the sub stance of the interview. Mr. AsuunsT—The whole P—The whole, and he then left me. Have you now stated all the conversation in fact relating to the arrangement, which you state was made with you and Cook and Gladstone, and either of them ; I mean those two gentlemen in particular, and not any other member of the firm?—l think so ; all that appears to me to be important. Had you any communication with any other member of that firm except those two on the subject of the ar rangement of which you have been speaking ? No. This interview with Mr. Cook was in August? Yes. Then is the Court to understand that Mr. Cook and Mr. Gladstone were informed by you that you intended to remove and conceal your stock from any other credi tors, that you might hand that stock over to them? I must have a distinct answer to that question. Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD—I think you had better ask what passed—get what he said. I think it is not altogether the thing to ask a witness what the Court is to understand. Mr. ASHURST—What did you say to Mr. Cook or Mr. Gladstone about your intention to conceal your goods and hand them over to them? Nothing, because I was desired not to do so. Nothing in direct terms. In what way, then, did they understand? Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD—You had better make him state in direct terms what he did say. Mr. AsifunsT—What did you say to them, directly or indirectly, upon the subject? I said as their debt was about 19,000/.—at all events we would agree that that should be the sum for the purpose of calculation-- that I would return to them, or send to them, linens amounting to eight hundred pounds. I wrote them a second letter in lieu of the former, to enable them to prove or recover against Steels and Co., paying them a bill of exchange about 203 L I agreed to them writing off the account 2,000/, to leases, and that I would assist them in proving under my estate, and recovering 7,070/., being a moiety of 15,1401., that they would be entitled to 3,5001. from my partner, and that they would leave a balance of 3,5701., that I would get Mr. Buzzacot to be security to the extent of 5001. against loss, and with the remainin g 3,070/. I wou ld get them out. This is the substance of the explanation, or of the arrangement. Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD---DO you mean that it was your direct communication to conceal goods to get them out of the amount ? Witness—Yes. Mr. AsHußsT—Was that communicated to them ? Witness—l never-told Messrs. Cook and Gladstone di reedy, but many winks and nods passed that were under stood between them. Is that the only way you communicated your inten tion to conceal goods ? I think not. Did you say anything more than that which you have stated to them, or rather of them ? Yes. State what ? I don't recollect. Then, will you swear that having no recollection of stating anything else, you, nevertheless, did state some thing else ?—Yes : A great deal was said, which satis fied my mind then, but what it was I don't recollect now. Then this statement was made by you after Mr. Buz zacot's proposed security was spoken of ?—Mr. Buz zacot's security was proposed many times, not at any par ticular time. Will you swear that you did not write a letter, dated August 19th, appointing an interview for the 20th ? Mr. Commissioner HoLnovn—The more simple way will be to put the letter into his hai d is not fair to ask him about any document without showing it him. Mr. ASHURST (giving witness the letter)—ls that your handwriting ?—lt is, and I am perfectly prepared to explain why 1 wrote it. I think the letter is of im portance for my assignees to have.' Mr. AstitiasT—l shall put in this letter, as it may not be supposed there is any suppression on my part. The letter was then read, which was as follows: " Gentlemen, to - morrow,Triday,:at three o'clock, I pro pose, if convenient to you, to meet you at your house as before, when I shall be prepared to make arrangements for the liquidation of your debt.—l am, Gentlemen, your obedient servant, " WM. HITCHCOCK. " 19th August, 1841." Mr. ASHURST—Now, having, as you state, arranged for the concealment of your goods, tell me when you first commenced to conceal goods from your creditors? I have not stated that, if you will refer to my exami; Tition. I have not said that I concealed goods from my creditors. Have you not concealed goods from your creditors ? Did you not remove goods for the purpose of conceal ment from your creditors ?—No, but, in explanation, I sent out goods, as I had a right to do, for the purpose of complying with Messrs. Cook and Gladstone's request. That request was to get them out of the debt of 19,0001. without loss, and they left it to me. Mr. ASHURST—That is your answer ?—Yes. Anything more?—No, that will do. Now, did not you yourself take out goods to your house at Wesbourne-green, for the purpose of concealment, and were not these and other goods concealed from your creditors under this fiat ? They were taken there for the time being, without it being decided as to when they should be taken to Messrs. Cook and Gladstone's. Mr. ASHUEST having read the answer to the last question, The Bankrupt said, I have not finished my answer to that question. Linens to the amount of 8001. were also sent by my orders to :their works, and were equally concealed from , my creditors as the other goods, the linens not being entered in our books by Messrs. Cook and Gladstone's request ; therefore both the linens and the other goods were only deposited for the time being. Then, do you swear they were not removed fur the purpose of concealment from your creditors in the event of your becoming a bankrupt ?—Not from all. Mr. ASHURST—I except Cook and Gladstone—now answer the question?—They were concealed from the other creditors. Mr. ASHURST—That is not an answer. We know they were concealed, for they were found. Were they removed for the purpose of being concealed from your creditors in the event of your becoming bankrupt?— That was not decided at the time of their removal, nor were the linens decided on as to what should be done with them. Mr. ASHURST—That is no answer to my question. The question having- been again repeated, the bankrupt replied—No ; it was undecided what should be done with them afterwards. For what purpose were they removed?—They were at c d o e n p v o e si r t s eadtionthat myat was going on b housefor theettlilineeen u bei s n . g, pending a What was to be decided on afterwards?—As to what was to be done with these goods, and also the linens, in the same way. Who was to decide as to what was to be done with them?-11Iyself. When did you determine to conceal them from your creditors? -11 neverdetermined to conceal them from all my creditors You are assuming what is not a fact. Had you come to any d e t erm ination on the subject be fore the goods were seized by the messenger under this fiat P--No goods were ever seized by the messenger under this fiat. They were given up. Were any goods concealed by you, or sent by you, for concealment from your creditors?—No. • Did you not in July last remove goods to the house of R. Hayward one of your shop:nen, or cause them to be removed from your stock? —I think not. Will you swear you did not ? No. I did not, but I believe goods were sent from my house to his, and not from Regent-street. Were they not part of your stock ?—Yes. Did you not ask Hayward to assist you in looking out silks, shawls, gloves, and rihands ?—Yes ; and ;wo others, they being in my employ. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. OLD COUit - 1, The session at the Old Bailey commenced yesterday, being the second under the present, Mayoralty, an interval of only four days having elapsed since the ter mination of the last session. The Right Hon. the Lord Mayor, Alderman, Sheriffs, Recorder, and other of th e civic authorities entered he Court shortly after ten o'clock, and the Grand Jury having been sworn, The RECORDER proceeded briefly to address them. He said the unusually short interval which had occurred between the present and last session rendered their duties on this occasion comparatively light. Since the calendar had been made up twenty names in addition had been sent for trial. The calendar now comprised the names of eighty-four prisoners for trial. The cases were of ordinary magnitude, few of which required any remark from .him. Thero were, however, three cases which he would just call their attention to. The first was the case of a foreigner for stealing a quantity of wine orders and Portuguezre bonds, which, by a certain Act of Parliament, viz., the 7th and Bth George IV., was comprised as a larceny. Without expressing any strong opinion upon it, he would say he thought, it a case requiring further investigation. The next was against a person for stealing and secreting a will, made by a relation of the prisoner. If any person should be found guilty of stealing or secreting a will it was considered and construed as a misdemeanour, and the party charged, if convicted, was liable to the punish= ment as of a misdemeanour ; and he thought this also was a case requiring some further inves tigation. Thew was . a man who had been remanded frera„the last sessions on a charge of cutting and wounding. This case he also recommended them to put in the course of further inquiry. The other cases neither invoked points of law nor fact, further than their own judgment would surmount, and he therefore at once remitted them to their duties. Mr. Commissioner HoLnov - D—l see but one question to which the answer has been omitted. Mr. AsnuasT—And that has been most unfortunate for me. The Bankrupt—l had no professional assistance. Mr. ASHURST—When did you begin to send out goods through 'Walden ?—Early in July. I well give the narrative of Walden's goods now. Early in July, the goods were sent from my private house at Westbourne Green, and from other places, to Mr. Walden's house at Chelsea. , These goods, I think, amounted to about 1,200/. Having left on a Saturday night, about the middle of July, to go to - Cowes, on a visit to my family, I was surprised on Sunday morning to receive a letter from Mr. Hayward, my confidential manager, in which he stated that lie was surprised to hear that Mr. Walden had been offering, and had sold, some silks. I came to town that evening, and with Mr. Hayward went to Mr. Walden's residence, at about eleven o'clock at night. I found him in bed, but called him up, and asked him if he had committed a breach of trust by selling any of my goods.* At first he said he had not done so, but after pressing him a considerable time and insisting on seeing the goods, he then confessed that he had taken a large quantity of silks to an inn in Holborn, I think the George and Blue Boar, and having engaged a room or rooms there, he had called on several retail houses in the trade to sell them. • He did sell them to Messrs. Sewell and Cross, but those gentlemen honourably declined having the goods, except with a good reference ; the goods were therefore taken back in a cab to the George and Blue Boar, and he subsequently offered them to -.Shoolbred and Cook. Mr. Gregory Cook made an offer for these silks, the value of which at cost price amounted to about 700/. - After having made an offer for the goods be would not complete the purchase, but sent his buyer, who subsequently made Mr. Walden drunk, and succeeded in obtaining the goods at a lower price than they had before been sold to Mr. Cook. I think the amount they rea li se d was 2041. Mr. J. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. Cook stated that he would not give more, as they had GUILDHALL. '1 nompson , on a charge of defrauding Mr. 'l'. Powell of just had to pay 1,000/. to keep him out of Newgate. Two very respectable-looking persons, named Fletcher the sum of 50/. Mr. Pelham attended for the prosecution. Finding the goods had been sold in this reckless way, and . 7aylor, were placed at the bar before Mr. Alderman and without my knowledge, I told Walden that the prisoner Taylor was introduced to him as a general . tchornpuagnhiehdis although he had robbed me I would fergive him if he would assist me to get back the goods. The complainant stated, that about a fortnight since h c hn onn t He promised to do so. On the next morning, Monday, I removed the remaining portion of the goods from agent,_ who had very extensive connections amongst Walden's house, and then conferred with Mr. MY-ward the West Indian consignees, and he (Mr. Powell) ac eouttß.uiurms in in gl c ia a m lu , u t t o ts, pu at rc a ha la s r e g a e q p u e a r n u t u i n ty , as to how we should get back the goods. We decided should of fancy articles,which plan :—That Mr. Hayward engage the same rooms at the inn, they having folding' doors, or a door leading from one to the other, tage profit. The goods were brought to London, and on the following and that Walden should go to Shoolbred and Cook, an d stored in a r oom i n L i me -street, until their shipment, tell them he had done som e thi ng wrong, and get one of the prisoner Taylor giving him the key of the room as a the firm to come to the outer room to hold a con- security for the payment of the money advanced to ference with the rightful owner of the goods, who should tr e ect the purchase. For about four days subsequent be in the inner room, the door being left ajar. The the goods were left untouched, but on the fifth Taylor, buyer, before alluded to, of Messrs. Shoolbred and Cook in company with Fletcher, brought a locksmith and did come to that room, and Mr. Hayward and him (the burst open the door, when he removed a great quantity buyer) held a conversation, without seeing each other. of them, which were p l e d ge d at several pawnbrokers in After a good many th r e ats t h e b uyer , cm the part of the neighbourho o d. . Shoolbred and Cook, consented to return the goods. A number of other witnesses being examined in sup- John Twomey, 35, was indicted for stealing 2601b5. ar weight of currants; also other ticles, value 601., the pro perty of Edward Wilkins, his master. Mr. CLARKSON appeared for the prosecution, and stated' the case, from which it appeared that the prisoner, ne years back, had been in the employ of the prose e w, who is a wholesale confectioner in St. John-street, Clerkenwell. The prisoner left his service some time ago, and through the instrumentality of the prosecutor, entered the police force some few weeks back. The prosecutor met the prisoner, and the latter wished to re turn to his former service, and the prosecutor having such confidence in him took hint again into his service. A fortnight back the clerk to the prosecutor saw the prisoner put his hand into a barrel and take up some currants, which he put into his pocket. The clerk told the prosecutor, and the prisoner was given into custody, and on his lodgings being searched the property named in the indictment was found. A great quantity of other articles were found, consisting of nutmegs, figs, spices, plums, liquorice, almonds, raisins, allspice, pimento, and a great variety of confectionery articles. The prose cutor was in a large way of business, the returns being from forty to fifty thousand a-year. These facts were proved, and the Jury returned a ver dict of Guilty against the prisoner, and he was sentenced to seven years' transportation. port of the prosecution, and' the goods having been pro duced by the pawnbroker, and identified by Mr. Powell, Mr. Dixon, who attended on behalf of the prisoner, contended that the transaction was one of partnership, and without the pale of the criminal law. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON said he would adjourn the case until next Tuesday, but as there appeared a differ ence in the criminality of the two parties he should ac cept bail for Fletcher 's appearance on that day. MARLBOROUGH-STREET: STREE7I Yesterday Joseph Adams, the fashionable swindler, a ho was brought up in custody, from Southampton, was again placed at the bar, on his second re-examination. As on the former occasion, Mr. Humphrey, the solici tor, appeared for the prosecution ; Mr. Flower, of Hat ton-garden, on the part of the prisoner. After a number of shopkeepers, robbed by the pri soner, had been examined, William Terry, the sergeant of the Southampton police, who apprehended the prisoner, stated that on searching him he found about twelve shillings in silver in his pockets, and also a valuable gold watch. He likewise wore at the time a diamond pin and finger-ring. -On his being searched the follow ing day at the gaol at Southampton, a small bag in the shape of a heart, and made to tit in the cavity of the pie of the stomach, was found under his flannel waist coat, and next to his skin : it contained a EL Bank of England note, two sovereigns, and between 20 and 30 pawnbrokers' duplicates. In a trunk at his lodgings was found among the other papers a certificate of his dis charge from the General Penitentiary, Millbank, West minster, which led to the discovery that he had been con victed of felony, and sentenced to transportation. Mr. Charles Prince Hall, the Chief Officer of Bath, stated, that he was present at the trial and conviction of the prisoner, in 1834, at the Taunton Sessions, for steal ing two gold watches, of the value of thirteen guineas each, the property of Mr. Reginald Lautien, of Bath, watahmaker and jeweller. The prisoner was sentenced to seven years' transportation, which was commuted to imprisonment in the Penitentiary, and the prisoner served three years there, and then, by some interest, he obtained a free pardon. Mrs. Colonel Hill, who .had been summoned to attend, not having arrived in town, Mr. MALTBY said, he should remand the prisoner until Monday next, when, if that lady neglected to attend, lie should be under the neces sity of bringing her before him by a warrant. UNI VERSITY INTELLIGENCE OXFORD, DEC. 11.—Yesterday a convocation was holden, when the Vice-Chancellor nominated Dr. Symons, Warden of Wadham College, a pro Vice-Chancellor, in the room of Dr. Bridges, President of Corpus Christi College, resigned. In the same convocation the nomination of the follow ing gentlemen as select preachers, to succeed those who go out of office'at Michaelmas next, was approved:—The Rev. Dr. Williams, Warden of New College ; the Rev. F. K. Leighton, Fellow of All Soul's College ; the Rev. 11. E. Manning, of Merton College ; the Rev. T. L. Claugh ton, Fellow of Trinity College ; the Rev. H. Kynaston, of Christ Church College. The University seal was this day affixed to addresses of congratulation to her Majesty, Prince Albert, and the Duchess of Kent respectively, on the birth of an Heir Ap parent to the Throne. The Rev. J. G. Copleston, of Oriel College, has been appointed Rector of Offwell, Devonshire. The Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells has instituted the Rev. C. L. Guyon, of Wadham College, to the Rectory of Lamyat, Somerset, on the presentation of the Lord Bishop of Llandaff. The Lord Bishop of Hereford has appointed the Rev. Thomas Dowell, of Oriel College ' to the Incumbency of the new Chapel on 'Wellington Heath, in the parish of Ledbury. The Earl of Ilchester has presented the Rev. F. P. Voules, of Wadham College, to the Rectory of Middle Chinnock, Somerset. The Rev. E. R. Jones of Brasennose College, was on Thursday last elected a Fellow of Queen's College, on the Michel foundation. LLO Y D'S SHIPPING. LONDON, DEC. 13.—Wind this day at noon S.W. DEAL, DEC. 11, Wind W. to N.W., fresh; 12, W.S.W., fresh.—Arrd. Bengal, Garden, Batavia ; Kin nair, Lidderdale, Sydney, New South Wales ; Freedom, St. John's, New Brunswick ; North Briton, Montreal ; Freden, Newcastle, for Odessa. Arrd. from the River, Socrates, for Van Diemen's Land -; Courier, Cape of Good Hope ; Ludlow, Antigua ; Argo, Tiieste. Quebec, New York. OFF MARGATE, DEC. 12.—Lord Stanley, Benson, St. John's, New Brunwick. LIVERPOOL, DEC. 11.—Wind W.N.W. 12. W., mo derate.—A rrd. Undaunted, Valparaiso, sailed August 27; Thos. Ca'ty, Halifax; Lady Worsley, Aldebaran and Concord, Qi !bee the latter with part of cargo thrown overboara ; Jarrib, Faulkner, Sierra Leone; Brutus, Bonny, sailed Oct. 2; Devon, Calcutta, sailed July 29, and from St. Helena, Oct. 26 ; Empress; Savanilla, sailed Oct. 20; Susan, Ferris, Dalhousie; Lady Flora Hastings, Quebec. It blew a heavy gale from W. to W.N.W. last night, but it is more moderate to-clay at W.N.W. DOVER, DEC. 11.—Arrd. Prince Albert, from London for Buenos Ayres, with trifling damage ; John and He lena, Hamburgh, for Porto Rico. WHITSTABLE DEC. 12.—Four bales of cotton, marked F x C—D X, apparently a long time in the water, have been landed hero. PLYMOUTH, DEC. 11.—Wind S.W., strong breezes. Arrd. Delia, Quebec. SWANSEA, DEC. 12.—Arrd. Hinda, Valparaiso. ICiNuitoAD, DEc. 12.—Arrd. Briton, Quebec. PADSTOW, DEC. 10.—Arrd. the Glen!gervicy from Que bec; with loSs of bulwarks, &c. Some wreck, consisting of cabin work, &c., also an oar, marked " William Madron," have been picked up a few miles west of this place. SHEERNESS, DEC. 11.—The John, from St. Peters burgh to London, got on Shoeburypess last. night, but was towed off, and proceeded up the river w ith a steam tug this morning ; she has apparently received no other damage than being somewhat strained. KIRKWALL, DEC. 4.—The St. Alixey, Winshure, from St. Petersburgh to Newry, was wrecked last night on the island of Copulshaig ; part of the cargo (tallow) is floating out; crew saved. PORT ASKAIG, SOUND OF ISLAY, DEC. 7.—The Perthshire, Risk, from St. John's, New Brunswick, to Greenock, got on shore on the north side of this Island 4th inst., but was assisted off yesterday, leaky and strained. COWES, DEC. 11.—Arrd. Columbus, Egholm, Buenos Ayres. The Henrietta, Longford, from Liverpool to India, has been towed into Portsmouth, with loss of fore and main -masts, and bowsprit. BIDEFORD, DEC. 11.—The Agatha, Ileekema, from Havannali, was brought in here to-day, with rudder damaged and loss of sails, &c. PORSTMOUTH, DEC. 12.—Wind W.N.W. strong.— Arrd. Henrietta, Liverpool for Calcutta, with loss of foremast, head of mainmast, bowsprit, &c. during a gale 3d inst., in long. 14. Sid. her Majesty's ship Viper, Rio. FALMOUTH, DEC. 11.—Wind N.W. to W.S.W., fresh breezes.—Arrd. Azores packet, Peters, London for St. Michael's; Royal William (steamer), London ; Manney, Stuart, Liverpool for Oporto, with loss of jibboom, bul warks, catheads, &c., having been in contact, 7th inst., with the Vigilant, from Liverpool to Ostend, which lost bowsprit. Sld. Magnet packet, Madeira. Arrd. off, the Brothers, Currie, Monte Video. ConK, DEC. 9.—Arrd. Pons Alie, St. John's, N. 8., with loss of bulwarks, &c. Arrd. off, Albion, Metcalf; Tatmagouche. SUNDERLAND, DEC. 10.—The Cato of Dundee, from Dundee, was totally wrecked a few miles to the north ward last night, crew saved. POOLE, DEC: William and Fanny, from Swanage to Weymouth, in - running by this harbour having sprung a leak, su t i k i n t h e H oo k , crew saved. Arrd. Velocity, Wells, from Newfoundland. LLANMADOCK, DEC. 11.—The Lynch, Davis parted her moorings last night, and came on shore, crew saved. BERWICK. DEC. 10.—Ann Winter from Glasgow to Newcastle, got on Gaiwick Land bridge, 9th inst., but got off after throwing 'part of her cargo overboard, and proceeded. PORT TALBOT, DEC. 11.—Five pieces or American timber have been picked up near the Nash. CORK, DEC. 10.—Off port, a large vessel, supposed the St. Patrick from Quebec. YARMOUTH, DEC. 12.—Mary Ferler from Boston to London, is coming into the harbour leaky, having been in contact in the roads with the Tempestuous of Sun derland. Put back, Tantivy, Collings, Venice, with damage. VE — SSELS SPOKEN WITIL—Wm. Thompson, Bristol to Jamaica, lat. 45, lon. 11, by the Royalist, arrived at Cork. Emma Clinton, London to Port Phillip, 4th ult.. lat. 2 S., lon. 20 W. ; Aurora, Amsterdam to Surinam, 20th ult., lat. 22 N., lon. 32, by the Devon, arrived at Liverpool. 'Triton, Quebec to Cardigan, 24th ult., lat. 46, lon. 67, by the Glenbervie, arrived at Padstow. Ad dina, Nantes to Guadeloupe, lon. 38, by the Laborieux, arrived at Havre. Pilgrim, Hamburg, to Monte Video, Oct 26, lat. 4 N. lon. 23 W. ; Malvere, Oct. 31, lat. 9. lon. 24, by the Ernestine, arrived in the L o i re . Mon tague, Liverpool to Bombay, Sept. 25, lat. 35 S. lon. 23 E. ; Lydia, Copenhagen to Santa Cruz, 24th ult, lat. 27, lon. 35, by the Glenswelly, arrived in the Downs. A very fine grand pianoforte has been presented by his Grace the Duke of Northumberland to the North ern Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb.—Great Nortleeni Advertiser. On Saturday the Royal Agricultural Society of England, under the presidence of his Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge, held its half-annual meeting at the rooms in Cavendish-square. The Duke of Richmond, Earl Spencer, and other eminent farmers were present. The Report stated that Prince Albert had become a member of the Society, which was now 5,332 in nume rical strength. The intended meeting at Bristol, on the 14th of July was announced, and the limitation of the dinner tickets on that occasion to 2,400. The Society, it was stated, had applied to the Woods and Forests for a site whereon to erect a museum, library, model-room, reading-room, &c., for its members. Thanks to Professors Henslow and Daubeny were voted for their lectures, and after several speeches the meeting adjourned. HA REWOOD HousE.--The Earl and Countess of Sheffield have left for Leamington Spa, and Lord and Lady Portman have also left for Bry anstene House, their seat near Blandford. The Hon. George Cavendish, M.P., and Lady Louisa Cavendish leave in the course of the week for Ashford Hall, Derbyshire. The Hon. Wil liam S. and Lady Caroline Lascelles and Lady Francis Hope remain here for a short time longer. Thi s pr i ncely mansion is about to b e closed for, in all probability, two years ; and the lat e Earl's establish ment is forthwith to be broken up. The Earl and Countess of Harewood do not, consequently, purpose remaining here, but continue their establishment at Goldsboroug . h Hall, near Knaie borough. It is the present h p e.o r o e ur s gn e de n s, L t a Earls ysn,heiFc ' ho,Fos, intention not to keep s theup fine it is said, are to be but only for a year, p to ac M k transferred until the family goes out of mourning. . . _ THE MARKETS —YESTERDA Y ' CORN EXCHANGE. od riti Last week's arrivals of En fish grain were zu e x „ but good of Irish Oats. The fresh supply of wheat•wwl, moderate, (and fair of Spring Corn. Wheat, if fi l ' e s rather dearer ; other sorts dull at last quotati°llsi Barley, Beans, and Peas, unaltered. Good Oats foun a moderate sale, and supported their value ; other s ort s PIR y verIVALS heavy. FU Flour maintained its value. ~, ,gg. R O GRAIN IN LONDON DURING LA ST . ' • Wheat. I Barley. I . Flour ?,310 irs. 5,936 4ra. 7,43 0at5 1 qrs. 4 , 5 ' 8 53 at --- 11,373 6o x tit - 35i.400. English Irish Foreign 2.742 I PRIM; OK BO Wheat,Red (old) White (01d)..... —l. —s. Red 1841) s2s. 555. Fine 565. 635. - Superfine (;64. 675. —White (1841) 545. --a- Fine 62e. --Superfine 'Os. 725. —.-..—Foreign free 565. 766. - qg 3Ss. 406. Barley 265. 325. Grinding _'68. 326. Malting S3l. 366. Malt s6s, C 0.6 Fine New 645. &is. Pease, Grey, New 358. 376. -- Maple New . '366. 40i,' -- White 34s 365. —...... Boilers 376.42:. anal! (new)." .. ... A , ;‘, - (old) ......... - Tick (new) ..... (old) ...... -. Harrow /new).....• 01d).......,38 Brank ........... g Oats, Feed"... ...... ..... New 'ARO OF Beans, Si SPIT, - Poland .. 00 000000 New . 00000 - Potatoe.... ............. wew ........ - Scotch ........ ....... - Irish 16$. 5 9 3 . Flour Town (per sack)... .• , 545. - Seconds .... --- North Country... 54) Pw 74. Bran SMITHFIELD. This is generally considered to be the great (or Christ' mas) market. The show of cattle was remarkably fillet quite equal to any former season. There were some very fine beasts of the Devonshire breed sent by Sir WWII Knightley, and several lots of remarkably fine 414 ' The trade for all kinds of meat Was good, and fully rev sheep, lised the present quotations. Beasts, 4,3 34 ; 20,030 ; Calves, 89 ; Pigs, 419. Beef, 3 3 8d t° 59 4 1 Mutton, 4s to 5s 4d ; 4s 6d to 5s 6d ; Pork 45 to 5s 6d. TEA MARKET. There was little activity in the maet, but held 00 were not disposed to press sales, and Corkmpany's "lhe could not be purchased under is. 94-41. per lb. deliveries keep large. COFFEE MARKET. fees The market was dull for all sorts of Coffee, and p r of were barely supported ; 665. to 675. was the value good ordinary Ceylon. PROVISION MARKET. an d el Butter sold slowly. Fine Dutch at 102 s. anu el and the best Irish at 98s. and 100 s. ; Bacon diffi c ":s. sale, 565. for the best. Lard sold s l o wly at 745. 1 01 ",; . , ' for the prirnest. Hams dull, and offered at lowe r 114-7 1101? KET the Prices firm, and a good MA deßmand. p re vailed fo ra At brewers. Some holders were not disposed to rcali° the present rate's. TALLOW MARKET. price s There was a good demand f o r P. Y. Candle, an d 1l for were firm at 48s to 48s 3d for pa rce l s on the t a - 0 001 delivery up to the end of the year ; for spring i n 49s was the value. METAL MARKET. and fa Spelter in good request at 401. on the sr—, ot arrival. Iron and Lead firm, w ith a f a ir deals"' PRICE OF BREAD. for the lib The !behest ~ r iie of great' la the Iletwili.; is 100 Loaf. Gat d Breit may be had at 80. PRI,. E 3 OF SEEDS. ter I'' Per Cwt. 1 Per Quar _...s •-,', it o New Engl sh Red C10ver...763 95s St. Fein ..... ......... ......... 1.., ....., Old Ditto Ditto —s —s —s Rye Gia55........ ........ ......, .-: • New Foreign Di.to.- —s 70s 923'Pacey Grass .............• ....., 50 :',., Old Ditto Di,to —s —s —s:Linseed, fur feeding 0..., ftis 515 New White Clover 56s Sts 70s:Dit.o, for sowing.... "....s 4 . 1 411 Old Ditto Ditto New Tre oil .... .. sts .«» .. ....' mss ......s Old Ditto — s —s alg a 4 - o :lD H i e t in to i , , far crushing ••••,,, 4 ,4 0 3 s 20s Stis i Canary . ........ •••••••'' Tr . folium s 4Ss 70s English Carraway —s 50s 51s White Mu P st e a r rd!. u . s . Foreign Ditto i 29 S 46s 50s Brown Ditto. ..... .. 0:110 Coriander —s —s —s Tares ................••• 51; 112 1 b• 2 I a 0 t ow : t ill PRICE OF TALLOW, SOAP, &c. per - ....• 4 Town Tallow .. XL? 13 6 Melting Stuff.. ........ ' .. I .. i Yellow Russia White u 0 0 Graves ............. ....•"'-.. 0 ! Soap Ditto 0 0 0 Good Dregs 4 ............ la PRICE OF RAW FAT, per stone of 3 1135 ' ..'.O. I'- Price of Tallow (as stated by the Tallow Melters) ........ 0*" . PitICE OF ()IL b seo Rape Oil. brown, per ton ..... '''' X ro 0 Ditto, refined v Linseed Oil.-- ........ . Linseed Oil Cake at thLt Mill 1040) ........... /tape t eke, per ton ............... . .................. .....• ,±f COAL IVI Ships arrived since s. d. [A IiKET. last market.day, 10' 0. 1 " 0 ... il 0 Eden Main...». •"'''.... g° . 0 V 4 E. Eraddyll'il-latton.• 0 Walls End Harwell ..... g o $ IWalls End Bettor' •••••••'''` fO 1 Walls End Lambtou ...0_,..," 0 Walls End Russell's llettu,*. t o i Wall,:End Stewart's .......' go $ Wkfils - End Sliincla ...... ... j o 'Walls Hartlepool.. Al S o 'Walls End Adel .ide....**" id Walls End Coundun .......... ii g Walls Et. 1 Seymour e 0" .. Anthracite ........................ , ft Cowpen ..... . ........... .... ' Adair's 6 Bell, ltobson & Co. Hartley Pi 6' Buddle's West Hartley l6 (1! Carr's Hartley l6 6 Cherlot to Llolywed Ma n lB i Old Tanfield l4 • 1 anfleld Moor l9 0, Townley .... , 14 6. Walls End Brown's Walls End Clennell l5 6 Walls End Hedlcy lB (1 Walls End Hilda l7 6 Walls End Hotspur Walls End Killingworth NEWCASTLE CORN EXCHANGE. white.. Red. 5 , (8 4 . Wheat, Northumberland s4s. 665. ...... .5 ... p.. en& -- Norfolk and Suffolk 6.55. 683. .....• 04 !' 5. 0 b . Berwick and Scotch ......... --.-- Foreign 66s. 706....... „, ...... Rye, Norfolk and Suffolk 44, 4tis ....... -- •-_;. ....s.. - Foreign 36s. 414 ....... ...-f. Barley, Malting, Norfolk and Sufiblk 3ls. 3.55.. .....' '7: : ....l. 1 - Grinding and Feeding ally. 305...... • - • ,......F. Malt, Norfolk and Suffolk .B. 61: ...... "‘" .•_s• -..i. Beans, Small 42.. 444..... ....,J, .....-s. - - Tick ........ 444. 41s ....... „A.' Pease, White 4gs 445. ..i. - 1 . .... i. -..-••••• (Gray Oats, Northumberland, Potatoe ...... ... 21s. g1ig....... --- . --- Feed ..•••• ...... `22s 624 g --g• ....,, j - Foreign __,J Flour (per sack) 4Js. 5., - 4. - ' SCOTCH MARKETS. -----",<,- 1 Wheat. Barley. Oat l . B eans . 4-1 ' t -‘1 ;I,' •••• .1.1..........- ................... .-......,-..-......... •••••••••••••• ~3 0 , g GO to 70 28 to 29 15 t o ll -- - to -- ' . ..;j ;,/' 35 47 15 24 15 21 - 30 0 , 40 52' 22 .24 17 19 28 ..!N -. 1 . A 48 05 26 31 18 22 22 ''' s 7 f 6 61 19 34 18 09 37 3 . 1 '.... 5 70 7.2 30 31 0 2 c 26 1 8 . 1.. i CO 70 , 29 31 22 25 3 2 , 1 -.. 40 55 24 27 17 20 : 3 ? 4; 4 " ~..' 54 06 29 35 20 25 45 44 Il ° ry. 60 67 39 40 25 35 41_.Enec°- I thcrdecn 60 to 70 28 to 29 15 to 21 I—to —„ Berwick 35 47 15 24 15 -21 30 „ 3 „'' Zoldstrearn Cupar (Fife' 48 05 26 31 18 22 122 „.",, Dunbar.. , M 1;1 19 34 18 0 6 37 '''' 54 Elgin 7O 72 30 31 22 26 1 8 3 3 Inverness D) 70 29 31 22 25 OF 22 n .-. Kelso ........ 40 55 21 27 17 20 f3 O 48 " •-• Kirkaldy Perth 6O 67 39 40 25 35 4 1 , it , e coo' - j„1 - e• Tho size of the measure vari es tbrou9 ll°°- fe' ° ' EDINBURUII CORN MARK';; P. 46i (1. Wneat. Barley. Oats. 14 46 :0 , 1• 43 1. I ,', First 803.0d 355. i'd. 09s 0,1 41 0 06 ° Aeon(' tO 0 32 0 2t 0 8 0 , Third 4B 0 28 0 19 0 41 9i. 6 °' Average price of Wheat ..... ....... ..... " I..t i PRICES OP PRovisloNS. 4C ,'„ li vm ~ 10 0 1 ,, Beef, per up. .... w.. Os. sd. to 02.4d..FreshButter, ''' 010 90 u Mutt0n.,..,..,.,„.....,. 0 5 0 7 Salt Ditto.--- , '" . 86 0 1 0 Vea1......................... 0 7 010 Ditto, per cwt. p 0 II 0 1'0rg........--....... 0 5 0 7 Eggs, per dos.: 8 0 I 0 d. Lamn, per qr. 3 0 4 0 OatStraw(kV. ) .... B 'o 9 0 Fallow, cwt..,..—.39 0 42 0 Wheat Ditto. ~ 0 3 0 ' Quartern L0af...... U9l UlO 'Barley Ditto A.,. ll Potatoes.l4lb..... 0 0 0 5 Hay, perst....oo. j EDINBURGH MEAL MAR I IC I - 1,- , 4 13. 1 0 '1 0 2 0 ., Per Sack of 2801 b. Imp. Per Stone vi • ~ lv First Oatmeal Li IR (.. First Oatineat ..... .., i B 3 e a c r o l e l) y d m O e l a l l i 0_ ....... . . . . . I I 0 nl I 6 0 Second a.le;R*, ditto e a i .. ..... . . : . 0 . : : .: ...". ... .. .... S 1 1 0 Peasenteal I 8 0 Feast...meal ........ ... Pot Barley from 30s. to 4Qs. per sac K se. HADDINGTON CORN MARKETS ro od Wheat. I Barley. I Oats. IBe 0d ". Od_.' SecondFi Fir5t......... t .. .. ". . 59s Od 06 3 34 1 s s Id 2 2 7 35 . 6 d °4 '''' :u. 7; Od ed- .- --A °': Third s4s Od 231; Od 21s Od ---,,,,.. Average... .......... ....... 34. gs„ 33.7 1 ."" - (1 , I. GLASGOW CORN Mt RKES i.d. gi o Wheat. per 2401 b. a. d. s.d. 1 rtritish, old ---- new B I r r i i ' t h a t i h ,.. a...t3'........p...e.....r...77.471 ... 1 1 g 0 t° : 1 9 Canada, free 0 0 Beans, per 0• 0 " 2 2 6 0 0 Irish Barley, Per 3201 b Scottish ... .. . ........... ef. , 6 190 English 27 629 t) I Pease. Scottish ..•••• II 0 010 Scottish 2l 0 27 6 Oatmeal, per 1' 1 b .. " 44 0 'HA DA LKEITH CORN MARKET. , Se pd 1 Wheat. Barley. I Oats. 1 143 ;; 44' 0 , 1 1 64s 6u 35s 06 ,t, rd 44q v‘` 40. 1 6 .1 60s Od 31s Ed 22s 44 4 1 s a ll 3 4 42s Od 22s Od 2s Od 345 " _.O S _____ first Second Third --- ur• By a singular mistake yesterday, in set I %post' letter, instead of " the workhouse board," oa r , c „T v thet tors r,,ndered itworkhouse boar i 1" L a , characterised " insolvent debtors" as . " n solew , "- -Leeds Times. sp- - GOLD WATCHES.—E. J. DENT, b Qtv' e " the v e appointment, Chronometer and Watchmaker to , % teto l t ,. and his Royal Highness Prince Alb( rt, offers so ; 04 , eac — , assortment of HORIZONTAL WATCHES at 1 01 d 'oca, From their great advantages over those of the verties. _ O O O tion in performance, appearance, and flatness, he reo•weiegsati them for Ladies' and Gentlemen's wear. They ba s t e to 1 , 1. „ engraved or plain gold dials and cases, and the mov ei l. jewelled in four Dent's the performance guarant°e• 0 so abstract from Mr. Lectures on the Constructtobe hoi Management of Chronometer Watches and Clocks 1 1I7 Str a4. gratuitously by customers, or to the public price PATENT LEVER WAT‘ ,-- .,bich - This celebrated construction (the most acc urate en - watch can be made) is now offered at the following Poet, with the latest improvements, i. e. the detached eserojtv jewelled in four holes, hand to mark the seconds, a n taining power to continue going while winding uPP SILVER CASES With double-bottom cases, capped ......... 61: With hunting cases, capped, •• COLD CASES. 0 Size for Ladies, with elegant gold dial ... 12 14 0 Ditto in double-backed oases..• 14 : 3 0 Size for Gentlemen, enamelled dial ..:••• 1 .1 17 °. Ditto extra full size, capped .................• 1 ' 41 ,, /0 0 ' 4 1 A Pamphlet, containing observations respecting the b° l constructions on which watches are made, with the 1 31 ; 1 _ 00 in gold and silver cases, and a variety of sketches et P o ol V signs, which have just been completed in gold Chains' A. 0. sent, gratis and postage free, on application by letter h t l, Les' SAVORY and SONS, Watchmakers, No. 9, C° lll don, opposite the Rank of England. BIR . ,_ iners et , On the 9th inst., at Ven Hous THS e, Milborne Port , the lady of Sir William Coles Medlyeott, Bart., of . 3 _, ar l, " : 10' On the 10th- inst , at Bermondsey - square, Sout h William Hall Turner, of a son. the Belgrave. square, sm O e n e, t E he sq l . l: s h urg ir e is o t n . : oaftaks'ionns.bury-circus, the lady - On the 12th inst ., in Chapel-street, _.....---- A lady of John Morgan, Esq., of a son On the Bth inst W. C. of °n" le • , c Warwick, et t h o er E s tloiznab:ft theA s n a n m , eycoouunngteys, daughter of t 1s0" 0 On the 10th inst', at Broxbourne, Hertg, George echo n j Esq., jun., of Abingdon street , London, to '°"- daughter of R. Wilkes, Esq., of Hoddesdon, Herts. DIED. mi O N n ail t . lr Es l q 6 . th ult , at Montreal, Anna, wife of Lieuten‘afr Colonel John Eden, C.B. JoiP On the 9th inst., at Woodside-crescent, Glasgow, OP On the 9th inst., at Gibson's-hill , Norwood, Surreys J. Overton, aged 82. t the On the 9th inst., at Stonehouse , Devon, Mars's ) . 00 , widow of the late Lieutenant-Colonel G eor g e Fearoup a' • Majesty's 31st Regiment of Foot. On the 9th inst., Mrs. Marc , of Ha therton, near NaulWich'' Cheshire, aged 53. iOn the 10 th inst. , in Guildford-street, Samuel B irch, Esq 4 lit o Alderman f Candlick Ward, aed 85. ' O n the 10th inst., at ew Upper Hollowa g y, Mr. John Davi°44 ondon: Printed aid Published by MURDO YOU' d , the County of Al idcUescx, in No. 112, Strand, at The Sus Office, No. 112 Straa. Tuesday, Decembe r 1 1134; MORNING SUN 0