The Sun. — London, England, 1847-11-09 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, Nov. 8. CURSON V. BELLWORTHT. This appeal from the Vice-Chancellor of England was argued some time ago. The bill was to set aside a conveyance of ten acres of land at South Tawton, in Devonshire. The estate was devised by the grand father of the plaintiff to his father in tail male, and was subject to a mortgage of 1204, with interest. The father died in 1840, leaving the plaintiff; his eldest son and heir male. It was alleged that he was a person of weak mind, very illiterate, and easily imposed on, and that the defendant, a man of substance in the neigh bourhood, had taken advantage of this circumstance to impose on him. The evidence showed that the plaintiff, being in want of money, during his father's lifetime entered into a negotiation with the defendant to sell his contingent interest in the farm for 401.; that he went to the office of the defendant's solicitor in Crediton to have an agreement for that purpose drawn up; and that at various times the defendant advanced small sums of money on account of the proposed purchase. At a subsequent period the plaintiff placed his mark on a paper, which, as he alleged, he thought to be an agreement for the sale of his contingent inte rest. On the death of the father the plaintiff com pleted the agreement for the sale, but received 40/. in addition to the original 401., it being found out that the paper which he had signed before was merely a bond to secure the money advanced. On this ground, and that of inadequate value, the bill asked to have the contract set aside. At the hearing in the court below, the Vice-Chancellor was of opinion that the proof of fraud had failed, and that a mere case of inadequacy of value was not sufficient to set aside a conveyance when ouceicompleted. His Honour there fore dismissed the bill with costs. The LORD CHASCELLOR now gave judgment. The bill was filed to set aside, on the ground of fraud and misrepresentation, an agreement for the sale and con veyance of a farm alleged to have been executed on the 24th .of September, 1840. In order to entitle the plaintiff to that description of relief which he prayed, the alleged fraud must, in his Lord ship's opinion, appear clearly on the face of the bill. To entitle the plaintiff to succeed, it must appear he has proved the fraud so alleged in such a manner as to take from the defendant the legal title he has ac quired, and if this was t) be done in consequence of admissions made by the defendant, he could not make use of such admissions unle7s they have been specifi cally charged in the bill, fer otherwise the defendant would not know until it was too late in what manner he was to meet the case made against him. This was a rule hi: Lordship had frequently laid down. The case made by the bill res"-d mainly on the ground of a want of adequate consideration, and a kind of misunderstanding, arising out of certain transac tions between the parties when money was borrowed in 1838. It was not very easy to understand how the lending of money on bond could be understood as a contract for sale. That, however, was the only equity made by : the bill, and on which the Court was asked to set aside the sale. The plaintiff also based his claim to equity on certain conversations that were set forth in the answer of the defendant. If the case made by the plaintiff in his bill had been sus tained, then conversations might have been of im portance, but they could not of themselves support the claim for relief, and there was in opposition to them the clear evidence that the plaintiff knew well in 1839 and 1840 all that was going on with respect to the farm, and that the deed was actually read to him. The case for the defendant mainly depeneed on the worst of all evidence of the charges containcd in the bill, and his Lordship was clearly of opinion that the charge of fraud against the defendant wholly failed. It was, perhaps, to be regretted that any sale should have taken place under such circumstances, but-if the plaintiff had an equity, he had mistaken the course to obtain it. Tha order of the Vice- Chancellor was the proper one, and the decree must be affirmed, with costs. BELL AMY C. SABLNE. This was an appeal from the Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce, also argued some time ago. The plaintiff was tenant for life of estates in Dorset, and being in debt, joined with his son, by the advice of Sabine (the defendant) in cutting off the entail. The estates were conveyed to Sabine, in consideration of his making a provision for the joint lives of the father and son, and of the grandchildren. No such provision was made, but some trifling RIM were given to the Bellamys, and Sabine raised money for the payment of his own claims. Edward Bellamy, the eldest son, died, and a bill was filed by Francis Bellamy, his next brother, to set aside the conveyance to Sabine. The cause was heard before the Lord Chancellor, when Master of the Rolls, and a decree was pronounced, declaring the conveyance inoperative, but holding the sums raised by Sabine to be incumbrances on the estate, and referring the matter to the master to take the usual accounts. Pending these proceedings, Bel lamy, the father, filed the present bill to have the money raised by Sabine handed over to him, on the ground of the decree in the former suit being unfa vourable to Sabine. The Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce dismissed this bill, but qualified the dismissal with a declaration that although the plaintiff was not entitled to a specific performance, yet that there might be a reference to the Master to inquire how far the question at issue was affected by any circum stances or acts of the father or son, subsequent to June, 1837, when the transactions with Sabine com menced. His LORDSHIP now gave judgment on the appeal. His Lordship observed, that before he considered the main question in the cause, be thought it necessary to advert to two points whida appeared in the decree of the Court below, on which 'he bill, as it stood on the file of the court, did not a7pear to have asked the Court to carry into effect. It appeared by the decree of August, 1844, that the plaintiff obtained liberty to amend his bill, by adding a new prayer to it, and that although the defendant did not object to that amendment, yet that he did not give his assent to it, nor put in any further answer in consequence of it. His Lordship felt it necessary to say in the outset, that such an alteration in the record, at such a time, was highly irregular, and that it ought not, on err, occasion, to be used as an authority for such a pro ceeding in future. The other point to which he thought it necessary to direct attention was, that the bill appeared to rest the case of the plaintiff on the agreement made between the two elder Bellamys and Sabine in June, 1827. That agreement, therefore, put in issue the whole rights of the parties, and enabled the Court to decide on them. Now, the decree of the Vice-Chancellor was a decision against the claim of the plaintiff, although at the same time it directed a reference to the Master to inquire into subsequent transactions. This proceeding would have the effect of putting the parties in a con dition to make out a fresh case before the Master, and one altogether independent of the case already raised by the bill. His Lordship thought this also to be very irregular, and not calculated to make a de cree secundum allegata et probata, but producing results at variance with those contemplated by the parties, and introducing disorder, uncertainty, and confusion into the rules of the court. The judgment did not proceed on either of these points, but on the merits, and the d ecree , b y re f us i ng relief, did not, as was alleged, leave the plaintiff to his single legal remedy, because the bill was not for a specific per formance, but to carry out a something arising out of the decree already pronounced at the Rolls. That decree directed a conveyance to Francis Bellamy in fee, and it concluded the rights of the parties, as far as the agreement was concerned. His Lordship was of opinion that the direction and the decree of the Vice-Chancellor would be inconsistent with the decree at the Rolls ; and as he still considered the decree made it'the Rolls to be the proper one, he thought the decree of the Vice-Chancellor ought to be re versed to such an extent as to make it in accordance with the decree at the Rolls. VICE-CHANCERY COURTS. Nov. 8. (Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR Of ENGLAND.) . TRH GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY V. THE BIRMINGHAM AND OXFORD JUNCTION RAILWAY CONMAN Y. Sir F TZROT KELLY resumed this morning his ar guraeut in this cause. The governing bodies of the two companies, Wolver hampton, and luadlled of . the • Birmingham, Wolver a contract on the 12th o f Dudley Railway Company, entered into it NVIS agreed that th e l3. November, 1846, by which the Birmingham and Du dley iiningham and Oxford and amalgamated, and that the Companies should be be purchased by the Great W e lines of railway should the latter now sought to have stern. This agreement and the question whether the CosuPecically performed, enforce its performance was no w Chancery would neral demurrer filed by he defendant s argued upon a ge bill. The Birmingham and Oxford t i,tathe plaintiffs' Com pany was incorporated by an Act of Ra ilway Passed in July, 1846, and it was authorisedarlianaent, make a railway from Oxford to al to Fenny Compton, in Warwickshire, witl3:c: called a million sterling. About the same time the litPital of irming ham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley Railway c oin _ p ane , with a capital of 700 , 0001 . , was similarly in corporated. The, agreement of November blended 700 th e se two capitals int o one of 1 , ,000/ , which w „, divided into 85,000 shares of 20/. each, and fixed the purchase-money at 30/. ss. per share, to be paid upon l. the completion of the line, or, at all events, before July, 1850. The first objection taken by the Learned Counsel to the contract was, that it was not binding on the shareholders of the several co mpanies. -- 1 Eli s . i ' ~ , The parties to it were the governing bodies of the /-----_-\,,.-., ,_.. 1 companies, whose powers were limited to the scope f ",- ~,<::,F=-21 and objects for which they had been constituted, and " 4 /__`,- —_ consequently did not extend to authorise their enter. ....c -- . ing into such a contract as the present. The directors, in ..,:-, . enteri ng into it, had clearly exceeded their powers, ~... .- • nsequentl it ~-_-,,,:e . i....Y did not bind the company t_-_,t , gent iy, nor would it, although a majority of the ja -- - 1 , -- "r..... - - - tc e olders were to ratify it. The Learned Counsel THE referred to several decisions on this point, and among others to the case of Ward v. the Society of Attorneys, 1 Cole,where it was held that a single;dissentient mem ber might prevent an incorporated society from surrendering its charter. But even if the Act thus done by the directors had been within the scope of their authority, the statutes of mortmain would necessitate an application to Parliament to enable the Great Western to hold the land they had contracted to purchase. The aid of the Legislature, however, was, independently of that point, necessary to com plete the performance of the contract; and if so, how could this Court enforce a specific performance ? If the Court is to make such a decree, let it be consi dered how the contract is to be performed. The first thing to be done is to amalgamate the two railway companies; that could only be effected by the Legis lature ; and the Court must therefore decree that the defendants shall apply to Parliament for an Act for this purpose. Was there any precedent or authority for such a decree ? . His HONOUR, after observing that there were two Acts, one of which authorised the Great Western to purchase the Birmingham and Oxford Railway, and the other authorised the said body to purchase the Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley line, asked whether the contract in question might not be consi dered as two separate contracts for those two separate purposes ? Sir F. KELLY admitted that two contracts might well exist on one paper ; but the present agreement was not for two distinct sales, but for the atnalga 'nation of two railways, and the sale of the amalga mated lines. By the 69th section of the private Act of the Birmingham and Oxford Company, it was enacted that it should be lawful to that company, with the consent of three-fifths of the shareholders, to sell their line to the Great Western Company, and that, on the completion of the purchase, the two com panies should thenceforth be amalgamated. There was also power in another Act to enable the Birming ham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley Railway Company to sell their railway to the Great Western, but there existed no enactment authorising the amalgamation of the Birmingham and Oxford and the Birmingham and Dudley lines. With respect to the decree now asked, however, if the contract could not be performed without an Act of Parliament, such an Act must be obtained; but would a court of equity interfere with the constitutional rights of the subject so far as to compel persons to petition for an Act contrary to their own wishes, or to abstain from petitioning against it ? Before the Court would decree the specific performance of the contract, it would, at least, be satisfied that it could be performed ; but it was notorious that, do what the Court and directors would, an Act would not be obtained. The facts of the case were these :—There being an Act of Parliament empowering the Birmingham and Oxford Company to sell their e:.;lway to the Great Western, they had entered into an agreement to amalgamate with the Birmingham and Dudley Company, and then to sell the amalgamated railways to the Great Western. At that time there was no Act authorising the sale of the Birmingham and Dudley to the Great Western. Two Bills were accordingly brought into Parliament, one to authorise the sale, and the other to effect the amalgamation. The former passed, and the sale was authorised, subject to two conditions, neither of which, he observed by the way, had been performed. The Bill for the amalgamation, however, was lost in the House of Lords, because it was not submitted, after its introduction, to the share holders, and approved by three-fifths of their number. The plaintiffs, by their bill in equity, stated that the Bill in Parliament had been promoted in accordance with the agreement, thus admitting that the directors of the Birmingham and Oxford Company ht.d supported the Bill. It was, in fact, opposed only by some of the shareholders. The standing orders of the House of Lords require the consent of three-fifths of the shareholders to the Bill; without that consent an Act cannot be obtained from the Legislature; and that consent cannot be obtained in the present state of the companies ; 35,000 out or the 50,000 shares into which the capital is limited being in the hands of persons avowedly hostile to the amalgamation. If the Court, then, decree a specific performance, it must first order the company to petition Parliament for an Act, and, secondly, order three-fifths of the shareholders to give their consent to the Bill after it is brought in. The prayer of the Bill is silent on this point ; it does not suggest how the Court is to proceed to enforce the performance of the agreement, but merely prays that it may be per formed. It goes on, indeed, to ask that in the mean time the defendants may be declared trustees of their railway for the Great Western ; but how long is this state of things to last ? Are they to continue trustees from year to year, from session to session, until three• fifths of the shareholders give their concurrence to the projected act ? It is impossible for the Court to make such a decree ad interiui,lwhen it cannot compel the performance of the compact itself. The plaintiffs are not now in a condition to ask for such a perform ance, for the very Act which empowers the Birmingham ,Ind Wolverhampton and Dudley Company to sell, declares, by the 25th section, that it shall not be law ful for that company to transfer their rail way until it shall be proved to the satisfaction of the Railway Commissioners that one-half of the capital has been raised by the Great Western for the purchase, and a certificate to that effect be obtained from the Railway Commissioners. This certificate, then, must be ob tained before the purchase is completed ; the Bill does not state that it has been obtained; it must, therefore, be assumed that it has not, and consequently the Great Western cannot at present insist on the pur chase. There is also this further objection. The original Act which authorised the sale of the Birmingham and Oxford line, enacted that no lease or sale should take effect unless and until the maximum tolls of the Great Western are reduced in the manner therein mentioned, which could only be done by the authority of Parlia ment. Last year another Act was passed, which provides that the tolls shall he reduced as soon as the transfer of the line has taken place, consequently the tolls have not been reduced, and until they are, the former Act prohibits a sale Of lease of the line. Fur ther, the contract sought to be enforced is void, even if the directors had authority in the first instance to enter into it, because it has not been properly con firmed. The 8 Vic., c. 16 (the Companies' Clauses Consolidation Act), directs that no matters shall be transacted at any ordinary meeting unless special notice of such matters shall have been given in the advertisement convening the meeting; that no extra ordinary meeting shall enter upon any business not set forth in the notice upon which it shall have been convened, and that every notice of an ordinary or ex traordinary meeting shall specify the purpose for which it i s ca ll e d. N ow , the Bill states that a meeting was called to consider the expediency of effecting an amalgamation, not that it was summoned to consider this contract, which had then been entered into. Immediately after the agree ment was approved of by the directors, an extraor ordinary meeting was convened by a notice, stating that it was called " for the purpose of considering, and if approved of by the meeting, ratifying an agreement entered into by the governing bodies, for the sale to the Great Western of the undertakings of the Birmingham, and the Birmingham, Wolver hampton, and Dudley lines." Here the notice was clearly insufficient; it did not mention that amalga mation, and therefore any ratification by a meeting so convened was a nullity. Mr. J. Parker, Mr. Bacon, and Mr. Willcock fol lowed on the same side, and their arguments engaged the attention of the court during the remainder of the day. (Before Vice-Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE.) HASLEM V. ROSS. The bill in this case was filed by the plaintiff against Mr. M. N. Ross, of Astley Hall, in the county of Lancaster. Its object was to obtain the possession of certain hereditatnents, which had been in the family since the year 1783. The bill stated that Adam Mort, by his will, dated 1830, gave all his landed estates to two persons in fee simple, and that in the year 1833, one of these two devisees charged his estates with the payment of debts, and died, leav ing the plaintiff his heir-at-law. To this the de fendant had put in a general demurrer. His HONOUR allowed the demurrer. (Before Vice-Chancellor WicaAm.) CARLISLE V. ELLIOTT. The facts of this case were reported in this journal of Monday. The plaintiff, the trustee of Queen Elizabeth's Hospital at Bristol, applied for the com mittal of the defendant for a breach of an injunction which forbade his quarrying in an adjoining close called the Jew's-acre, so as to injure the hospital. His Honour this morning said that if the acts com plained of had been done by the complainant himself he would clearly have been guilty of a breach of the injunction, and the only question on a motion for his committal would have been quo animo the acts had been done; and he did not think that the fact that the acts had b een d one in this case by the defendant ' s l o s s n e t e ruo , l ltii i Adams,inn ng t t the o hri ec coup s led with th e d e f en d an t' s own can uct, alt ere d the case. He had licensed Adams to quarry ands,at while eh nevertheless,at he acts dretained hine questionh the d tpowerstood dwereb f y withucommitted. The only redeeming point in the defen /lainst'isifoanvoouurr thenwas hdisieotate,rato repair the injury done. plaintiff' s 7o o l ff the order which he should make, the th purport of which was that (which f had the defendant should pay the been ordered to be paid in July last) wthitehinoshteosuorfdatyhes from the date of the order, and also present and the former motions, and that c also pay the costs incurred by reason o f the d'ahinouawld which had arisen from Adam s ' ac t. His Honoure also referred it to the Master to fix a line beyond which the defendant should not be at liberty to carry his works, and ordered thatuntiltha fortytlinewas yardsdeter mined upon, he should not work within the walls of the hospital. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Mt!. 8. HOPS AND RATS.-WRIGHT V. HUMPHREY. This was an action to recover compensation in da mages for injury sustained to several bags of hops by rats. Mr. Baron Parke tried the case at Maidstone, and the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, damages 601. It appeared by the declaration that the defendant, who is a warehouseman, had undertaken to warehouse and safely deliver over to the plaintiff a quantity of hops, which were assigned to his care. They were handed over, but it was found that a number of rats and mice had played sad havoc with them while under defendant's care. It therefore became a question for the decision of the jury, whether the mice had or had not got into the hops before they were consigned to the custody of the defendant ; such a thing, it appeared not being uncommon. A witness at the trial deposed that he weekly turned over the hops, and that every care, by having cats and traps, was taken to entrap mice and rats, showing that every care had been taken of the hops. But a witness, who was rather prone to exaggerate, deposed that he slept in the warehouse, and could not say that proper care was taken of the hops, as rats came forth in shoals and traversed his prostrate body, and on one o( casion he awoke and found a rat's tail in his mouth, which in his precipitation he bit off and swallowed. — (Laughter.) Mr. MONTAGUE CHAMBERS moved for a rule nisi, on the ground of misdirection, and that the verdict was against the evidence. The COURT deferred its decision until the Learned Judge had been consulted. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 8. FIERAIND V. LEAF. In this case, which was tried before Mr. Justice Coltman, and in which the verdict was for defendant, Mr. Sergeant &TEE moved for a rule for a new trial, on the ground of misdirection, and also that the verdict was against evidence. This action was brought to recover the sum of 1121. 19s. for literary articles, supplied to The Foreign, Colonial, or New Quarterly Review, of which the defendant was a proprietor. It appeared that it was originally started in March, 1843, and that certain resolutions were agreed to respecting the mode in which it should be conducted. One of them was that Dr. Worthington should be appointed editor, and that a committee of six proprie tors should be formed to assist him in promoting the circulation of the work, and obtaining as far as pos sible, without expense, literary contributions for it, but not to interfere with the editorial departrne nt. Mr. Powell, one of the committee, introduced the plaintiff to Dr. Worthington, as a contributor, and several articles written by him were inserted, for which he was paid at the rate of 81. per sheet. Sub sequently, however, he wrote an article on the philosophy of Descartes, which did not accord with the sentiments of the editor, and it was refused, with an intimation that no articles from the same writer would be published in the Review. The plaintiff, however, continued to write, and handed his papers to Mr. Powell, and they were inserted as usual, and the present action was brought to recover the amount due from him. The principal question upon which he based his application was as to whether the articles were supplied gratuitously. Mr. Powell stated at the trial, on the part of the plaintiff, that the contributions were received, on the understanding that they were to be paid for. Dr. Worthington, on the other hand, stated that his im pression was that they were supplied gratuitously by Mr. Powell, and that he did not know that they were the productions of the plaintiff, otherwise he should not have admitted them. The Judge, in summing up, left it for the jury to say—first, whether they believed the articles were supplied gratuitously ; and secondly, whether the name of the author had been fraudulently concealed from the editor, and if he would have rejected them had he known that they were Mr. Ileraud's. The jury then asked whether any proprietor could contract for articles without the consent of the editor, to which the Judge replied in the negative. The Learned Sergeant new argued that the words in the resolution, to the effect that the committee should, " as far as possible endeavour to obtain articles gratuitously," gave Mr. Powell an authority to contract for articles to be paid for. He also argued that Mr. Heraud was not liable for any concealment on the part of Mr. Powell, in not making the writer's name known. The editor had received the articles, and carefully considered and altered them previous to publication, and he submitted that all the proprietors were liable for the amount due to the plaintiff, at the rate of 81. per sheet. The Court, after considerable deliberation, deferred their decision until to-morrow. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, Nov.B. (Sittings in Banco.) BURNSIDE V. DAYRELL. This action was tried before the Lord Chief Baron during the sittings in London after last term, when the verdict passed for the plaintiff, with 421. damages. Mr. CROWDEE, pursuant to leave reserved to the defendant at the trial, now moved for a rule calling on the plaintiff to show cause why the verdict should not be set aside and a nonsuit entered. The defendant was sued as chairman of the provisional committee of the projected Direct Manchester, Leeds, and York Railway, for the recovery of a sum of money paid by the plaintiff as deposits on a number of shares applied for by, and allotted to him, in that scheme. The scheme was abandoned, and at the trial of the cause it appeared that the defendant never acted on behalf of the concern subsequent to this allotment, but had attended one meeting only, at which he protested against the whole of the proceed ings. He had, however, imprudently allowed his name to stand in the prospectus as chairman of the committees. The question now concerned in the case was simply as to the party with whom the con tract was made. On that point the evidence was, that applications for allotments were sent in to the pro visional committee, but that the managing committee finally made the allotment. The Learned Counsel thereupon contended that there was no contract with his client, as he was not a member of the managing committee. The argument on the other side was, that the contract was made with the whole body of members, and delivered to the plaintiff by their secretary, whose evidence was rejected. The LORD CHIEF BARON said, he was of opinion thst the secretary's evidence was inadmissible, unless it was supported by the authority of the board in the several matters it referred to. He thought, there fore, that there should be a rule nisi. Mr. MARTIN afterwards moved for a new trial, on the ground of the rejection of the secretary's evi dence. After a long discussion, in which it was endea voured to bring the cross rule before the Court, at the same time as the rule for the nonsuit, by engrafting it upon the latter, it was finally arranged that the defendant should take a rule nisi for a nonsuit ; and that, in the event of its being made absolute, the plaintiff might take a rule nisi for a new trial. Rule nisi accordingly. POTEZ V. GLOSSOP. In this case Mr. COCKBURN moved for a rule nisi to set aside the verdict for the plaintiff for the sum of 1001., on the ground of improper rejection of evi dence, and misdirection of the Learned Judge who tried the case. The action was heard before the Lord Chief Baron at the Middlesex sittings, and was on an assumpsit upon two hills of exchange for the sum of 2501., pay able four months after date, and bearing date Aug. 29, 1846. The facts of the case, as shown by the evidence upon the trial, were the following :—A person of the name of Gardiner was in the habit of carrying on business as a bill-discounter, under the name of Rutter and Co. The place of business occupied by him was in Fludyer-street, at premises for which he paid a certain sum for the use of during the day. Advertisements were inserted in the news papers by Gardiner, offering to advance money in sums not exceeding 2,000/. upon personal security at very moderate interest,. The defendant was a clergyman, and was induced in consequence of these advertisements to apply for money upon the terms stated. A correspondence ensued upon the subject, and subsequently the two bills of exchange which form the subject of this action were ac cepted by the defendant and given to Gardiner Repeated applications were made for the money, to be advanced upon the bills, but was repeatedly put off. On the 11th of September a person of the name of Coyle obtained the sum of 1001. upon one of those bills from another person of the name of Gadderer, who, subsequently, took the bills to a Laurence Levy, ' who discounted them. A person of the name of Jones shortly after obtained possession ;of the bills. The action was now brought by a Miss Potez, for the purpose of recovering from the defendant, the acceptor of the bill, the sum of 5001., which she stated she had advanced to Gadderer for the same. The name of Miss Potez did not, however, appear upon either of the bills. A verdict passed at the trial for the plaintiff for the sum of 1001. On the part of the defendant a large number of pleas were placed upon the record, averring that the bills were obtained by him through fraud and eosin, and that the plaintiff had knowledge of the same, and certain letters were proposed to be put in from Gardiner to Glossop, with a view of showing that Gadderer was aware of the purpose for which the acceptances had been given. The Lord Chief Baron refused to receive them as evidence, and it was now contended that in so ruling his Lordship had im properly rejected important evidence, and upon this ground the verdict ought to be set aside. The COURT granted a rule upon this ground, con sidering th at t h e ev i dence was admissible ; and also upon the ground of misdirection of the Learned Judge. A decree of the Prussian Government forbids all workmen, of whatever trade they may be, to proceed to S witserland, under pain of fine and imprisonment. SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 9, 1847. POL ICE INTELLIGENCE. MANSION-HO USE. Elizabeth Crawley, a smart looking woman, aged 23, was brought before the Lord Mayor, charged by Mr. William Crawley, an aged pensioner at the East India House, Under the following remarkable circum stances : The complain ant, who stated his age to be 77 years, said that at about: two o'clock he went to the East India House from his 1 odging at Pentonville to receive his pension. After h e had received the money he put it in his trousers p ocket for the greater security, for he saw who was clt )se to him, and the moment he had buttoned his pocket, the prisoner, who was behind him, slipped her hared in to get hold of his purse, and made the most desperate efforts to possess herself of it, with all its contents. The LORD MAYOR—I see you are both of the same name. Is she your daughter? Complainant (sighing deeply)—No, my Lord, she is professedly my wife. I married her in St. George's Church, Bloomsbury, a little more than six years ago, when she was a nice egg of 17 ; but all she cared about was my property ; and that was her mother's object, too, in m,arryin ,- - me. Neither of them loved me. The LOICD MAYOR—What ! do you mean to say you were m arried to her mother ? Complainant— Indeed I do, my Lord ; and more is my sorrow ; the mother is just as bad as herself. The LORD AlArou--Then her mother, your first wife, is still alive? Complainant—Faith, my Lord, she certainly is ; but she is not my first wife. Ah ! never was there a better woman in the world than that blessed angel ; but she is gone to happiness. She died just before I married this one's mother. But I was in a state of insanity, from grief; and the pair got hold of me, thinking I had a large property ; and it pleased God to make them both commit a great mistake. The Loup MAYOR—Then you have committed the offence of bigamy, at any rate, in becoming the hus band of the daughter, her mother being alive. Com plainant—Oh ! it was their fault. The mother, after I married her, said she'd make her daughter marry me if I'd release her, so I consented, for, to tell you the truth, I liked the daughter better. Besides, the marriage !between me and the mother was never con s ummated. The LORD MAroß—And how soon after your marriage with the mother did that with the daughter take place ? Complainant—They over-persuaded me to marry the daughter at St. Sepulchre's Church about a fortnight after, and I have never had a happy moment since I was in comfortable circumstances when I met them, but now I have nothing but my pension, and that she just tried to rob me of. They are the greatest pair of devils that ever the Lord per mitted to come up against us. The prisoner said she was the victim of the grossest deception. Her mother, it was true, had married Mr. Crawley, but she was not a day with hila when she found out what a bad one he was, and, poor woman, she was glad to get rid of him upon any terms. The LORD MAYOR—So she gave him to you for a husband? The prisoner—She just did. Well, what does he do after being married to me so long ? Why, he not only refuses to give me a farthing, but he denies half-a-crown a week to our child, a fine little girl just six years old. The LORD Maroß—Why, Mr. Crawley, can you not contrive to support your own child ? Have you any doubt that it is yours ? Complainant (laughing) —Doubt! Not a bit of it.—(Loud laughter.) Oh, no, my Lord; it's my own, and no mistake. The prisoner—Ah, you old villain, sarve you right if I had carved you out. Complainant—My Lord, I had everything com fortable about me until she and her mother got hold of my weakness. I was obliged to swear my life against her at Worship-street Police-court the other day. The prisoner—That's true enough ; and isn't it enough to make a woman mad to be the mother of his child and to be refused the least notice from his pocket? The LORD MAYOR—There is no law to oblige him to give you anything. The law will not compel him. The prisoner—He knows that well, and those that made that law are all of them like him, you may de pend. They did not make the law without thinking of themselves.—(Laughter.) The LORD MAYOR maid the old man certainly ma nifested a total disregard for the decencies of life, in the course he had been pursuing towards the prisoner and his child, but, as had been before intimated, the law could not touch him. Complainant—l am agreeable to anything in reason, my Lord. If her mother will promise t , ) take care of me, and protect me against her, I have no objection to try her again.—(Laughter.) The LORD MATOR.—I am bound, as a magistrate, to prevent this young woman from annoying you, and therefore I must bind her over, and compel her to procure sureties, if she do not promise not to moleA you. I must, however, impress upon you the neces sity and obligation upon you as a parent to provide for this poor child. Complainant—l cannot afford it, your Lordship. She Las had all the good out of me, and she must take the bad with the good, like the best of us. The LORD MAroa—Well, I see there is not much good to be had out of you. You must, however, recollect that between two wives a man may fall to the ground, and you have acknowledged your offence. The prisoner, having promised to coos the old man by with silent contempt, was discharged. MARYLEBONE. Yesterday, vi,as p a l a ced at smartly-dressed tbe bar be fo r e w oman, i n r . a 111 8 e diary r o d ghto Row, n for m re le -examination, and the Court was much crowded by persons, many of whom had, as alleged, been sufferers by the prisoner. The accused seemed very faint and ill when placed at the bar, and, by direction of the Magistrate, she was provided with a seat. Mr. Wolff and Mr. Sidney attended on her behalf. The evidence given upon two former occasions went to show that on the 29th of December last the prisoner succeeded, by representations as to her re spectability, in obtaining possession of a ready-fur nished house, 55, Welbeck street, Cavendish square, and that the lady to whom the said dwelling belonged was Mrs. M‘Clure, 22, Bentinck-street; the rent was agreed upon at 2001. per year, payable quarterly, and prior to the expiration of the first quarter the family decamped. Five blankets, a counterpane, and other articles were carried off, and information of the rob bery was communicated to the police. Every exertion was made to discover the prisoner, who, on Sunday week last, was apprehended by an active officer, Marsh, 121 E, who met her in Margaret-street with her daughters while on their way to church. None of the property stated to have been stolen had been met with. • Some additional evidence was now given, a great deal of which had a tendency to show that the pri soner had for a considerable period been pursuing a course of life in which, by her artful and systematic manner, she had victimized numerous persons. It was alleged that she had placed two of her daughters at a boarding-school, Tichfield House, Regent's Park, having given a feigned name at the time of her so doing, and that, immediately after they were taken away, without payment being made for their board and education, it was ascertained that they had stolen some towels, &c. In addition to the charges above referred to, it was stated that the prisoner, with her family, had occupied a house in Ball's-pond••road, Islington, and disposed of the furniture which was there at the time of the letting. None of the cases alluded to were substituted, the necessary witnesses not being in attendance. The constable, Marsh, was of opinion that he should be able to get up important evidence in a few days. A " suffererer” by the prisoner said he hoped that publicity would be given to what had already trans pired. Mr. BROUGHTON said it was advisable that such should be the case; and remanded the prisoner till Friday, giving her, however, the opportunity of putting in bail for her appearance on that day. WORSHIP-STREE T. A young man of gentlemanly appearance, named William Sh er id an, was charged, upon suspicion , of havin g cause d t h e d eat h o f his mother, Mrs. Frances Sheridan, th e w id ow o f a captain in the army , resid ing in M are - street, H ac k ne y, by administering to her some poisonous drug. Sergeant Hawkes, of the N division, stated, that in consequence of information reaching the station-house that the deceased, who had expired after a short ill ness on the preceding Friday, had come to her death by unfair means, he placed himself in communication with Mr. Drewett, the registrar of deaths for the dis trict, who informed him that the circumstances con nected with the occurrence were of so suspicious a character that he felt himself called upon to refuse a certificate of burial, for which application had been made, until all the facts attending it had been laid be fore the magistrate or coroner. An unfinished inquiry had since taken place before the last mentioned func tionary, who gave orders for the prisoner's apprehen sion, and he therefore repaired that afternoon to the house of the deceased, in which the prisoner also re sided, and took him into custody. On apprising him of the nature of the charge, he made no answer what ever, and quietly surrendered himself ; but on the road to the station stated that it had solely arisen from a bad feeling one of his sisters entertained to wards him ; the latter, however, was the principal witness in the case, and W 23 unable to attend, from injuries she had sustained at the hands of the prisoner who had so illused her that she had been ever since under the medical treatment of Dr. Garrod. Mary Armstrong, an elderly widow, residing i n the neighbourhood, who had been employed to assist ioffin layingces described about outah sbe t the being bodygin ahorriblyfilthy coccupied deceased, p ie er stated, that while performing that and various other house, which d h three d yo, she heard the sister accusing her brother, whom she called a villian, of poisoning her mother, and that, al though the accusation was frequently repeated by her, the prisoner made no denial of it upon either oc casion. The sister afterwards told her that she had been seriously ill-used by the prisoner in consequence of her interference. William Randal, the landlord of the house, spoke to his having heard constant altercations between the prisoner and the other members of his family, and to his having been disturbed by one of these scenes of unusual violence on the night preceding the death r‘f the deceased, and while, the latter was con fined to her bed. Police-constable Attwood, 94 N, also proved that in the course of a conversation with the injured sister, who expressed great indignation against her brother, and regret that she was too ill to appear against him, she earnestly declared that the prisoner had poisoned his mother, to whom three powders had been adminis tered, and that a bottle containing ether or some such liquid had been thrown away that day, for which she was extremely sorry. Mr. Edward Hacon, a surgeon in Mare-street, de • posed to having attended the deceased for the last four days preceding her death, in succession to seve ral other medical men, whose services had been dispensed with after short intervals of attendance, and that during that time she had been labouring under diarrhoea and extreme vomiting. She was progress ing favourably, however, under his treatment, until the day preceding her death, when the ques tion was put to him whether she was not in such a state of danger as to require the immediate prepa ration of her will ; to which he replied with some surprise in the negative, as she was decidedly better ; but upon► visiting her in the evening he found her alarmingly worse, and labouring under symptoms which could not have been produced by anything he had prescribed for her. This was about ten o'clock at night, and at four the next morning she was dead. The witness had since, in company with Dr. Letheby, chemical lecturer to the London Hospital, performed a post mortern examination of the body, and from a careful analysis of the contents of the stomach, and the extraordinary appearances presented by the liver, they had had no hesitation in coming to the conclu sive conviction that the death of the deceased had been produced by arsenic, of which they had discovered sufficient in the body to destroy the lives of several persons; and they were also decidedly of opinion, from the manner in which the poison had been ab sorbed, that some portion of it must have been admi nistered at least a week, and perhaps a fortnight, antecedent to death, and that a considerable quantity must likewise have been received into the stomach within 48 hours before she expired. On being called upon for his defence the prisoner repeated the statement he had previously made to the officer, that the charge had solely emanated from the malicious feeling of his sister, who was actuated by a groundless fear that he, as the eldest son, would take possession of the whole of the property ; and stated that he had been in the habit for some time past of allowing his mother 701. per annum out of his income for her sole use, but that she had been accustomed to allow his two sisters and a niece to participate in it, one of the former of whom, though married, was of such drunken, dissolute habits, that he had been in cessantly obliged to remonstrate against her being permitted to come to the house to disturb his mother, whom he was anxious to secure from annoyance, but that she persisted in doing so, and that that had given occasion to the violent contentions deposed to, in one of which he admitted he had used his other sister, as had been described. Sergeant Hawkes informed the magistrate that:but a short time before the death of the deceased applica tion had been made to the rector of South Hackney by some one on the part of the deceased, for his signature to a certificate of her existence, to facilitate the receipt of a pension of 401. per year, to which she was entitled as a captain's widow, and that, precaution having been taken to ascertain that she was really alive, the certi ficate was ultimately granted by the clergyman. Ile (the sergeant) would be provided at the next exami nation with additional evidence of a conclusive nature against the accused, and asked for time to be afforded him for its production. Mr. HAmmu.r. assented, and the prisoner, who displayed great self-possession throughout, was or dered to be brought up next week, when his sister, it was stated, would probably be well enough to attend. THE LATE SUSPICIOUS CASE OF POISONING. Yesterday Mr. IV. Baker, the Coroner for East Middlesex, resumed, at the Dolphin Tavern, Mare street, Hackney, an inquest on the body of Mrs Frances Sheridan, aged 70, alleged to have been poisoned under the following circumstances : . The deceased was the widow of an officer in the army, and lately resided with her son, William, an Excise officer, and two daughters, in the above street. On the former assembling of the jury, William was charged with having murdered the deceased by poison, and he was yesterday apprehended and taken into custody on the Coroner's order. Mr. W. Tidy, surgeon, of Mare-street, stated that he was first called to deceased on the 23d ult., and found her very sick and vomiting. She was having involuntary motions, and one of the daughters (a spinster) told witness that she had been taken sud denly ill, and had vomited similarly to her mother. Witness suspected that she had been taking some thing deleterious, and upon witness's inquiries upon this point, she volunteered an accusation against her brother William, complaining, at the same time, of various acts of violence on his part towards the family. It was stated by police-sergeant Hawkes,. N divi sion, that there had been family disturbances for some twelve months past, and they were of an eccen tric character, and somewhat addicted to drink. Mr. Hakin, surgeon, said he had been called to deceased,hiacrihd tooks saw p h l e a r ce fnew the hours 29th auit.sHt: had death, w since made a post mortem examination, and found the -kin about the posterior part of the body almost ors ap proaching to mortification, and a dark coloured mucus escaping from the mouth. The liver was unusually large, whilst the lungs were perfectly healthy ; the pericardium was also healthy. The stomach contained about six ounces of dark fluid. In the abdomen there was considerable congestion of the vessels of the posterior part of the belly and liver. Fhe cesophagus was very thin, and its lining mem brane ecchymosed, and exhibited such appearances as to require analysis. There were also su3pigious appearances about the duodenum. The contents of the stomach were sent to Dr. Letheby, for ana lysis. There was sufficient in the bowels to account for death. By the CORONER—lnstant poison could have pro duced all the appearances described. Dr. 11. Letheby, chemical lecturer at the London Hospital, stated that on Thursday last he received li three jars from Mr. Hakin, the smallest one contain ing the contents of the stomach, and the two larger ones the stomach and intestines, together with por tions of the liver and lungs. The CORONER—Can you just tell me one thing, that is, if there be anything in the shape of poison in this case ? Witness—Yes ; I have discovered arsenic, and more than in Mr. Nelme's case.—(Sensation.) The CORONER (to the summoning officer)—The prisoner had better be taken into custody at once. The man was immediately apprehended accord ingly. Evidence of Dr. Letheby continued—Witness sub jected about half a pound of the liver to analysis, and was able to detect an abundance of arsenic. (Exhibited to the jury a glass tube.) It was more than sufficient to cause death. Had further analysed the contents of the stomach, and detected arsenic there also. By the jury—There was an abundance of arsenic. The learned doctor then went into a very minute and elaborate account of the whole of the analysis, and added that deceased h a d ev id ent l y f or some time been suffering from arsenic, and from the circumstances of hie detecting arsenic in the contents of the intestines, he was led to an opinion that deceased had had a dose recently, viz., within forty-eight hours of her death. After much more evidence, The CORONER said it was clearly a case of such magnitude and importance that it required the double agency .of coroner and magistrate, and he should suggest an adjournment of the proceedings, so as in the interim the prisoner might be taken before the magistrate, and thus the matter would undergo a thorough investigation, especially as the magistrate's power of examining witnesses, &c , was not of so limited a character as his (the Coroner's). Adjourned accordingly. The prisoner, who seemed much affected, endea voured to escape. IRISH MINE3.—MEETING OF IRISH 1111311BERS.— We observe, in the report of the proceedings of the meeting of Irish Members yesterday, that one of the propositions brought forward related to the necessity for developing the great mineral resources of Leland. 'We think it necessary to remark, in erder to prevent misap prehension on this important subject, that nothing what ever in the shape of pecuniary aid is required by the Irish mining companies. What they require, and what is imperatively necessary, to facilitate employment in a great extension of mining operations in this country, is such a change in the law as would empower trustees and guardians of minors and lunatics, and holders of eccle siastical property, to take a lower rate than one•tenth as royalty, to what they are now most absurdly restricted by law, and also to enable them to make leases of suffi cient length to induce capitalists to embark their pro perty. A simple change in the law to this effect is all that is wished for, and, indeed, all that is necessary, to ensure employment to many thousands of people, in ad dition to those already employed in mines. We are confident that it is only necessary to call the attention of the Government to the subject, in order to ensure a prompt remedy for this crying evil, which none but the Government can supply,—Dubin Everting Post. STATUE AT LLOYD'S OF THE LATE MR. I - lU:7 , KISSON. The following correspondence relative to the placing of a statue, by Mr. Gibson, of the late cele brated Mr. Huskisson, President of the Board of Trade, in the vestibule of Lloyd's, will be perused with interest : " Whitehall, Oct. 25, 1847. " Dear Sir,—Having taken an early opportunity to inform Mrs. Huskisson of your obliging commu nication to me, conveying the opini on o f th e com mittee of Lloyd's, and expressing your belief that the offer of a statue of the late Mr. Huskisson would be received by the members of that establishment in a manner that would not fail to be gratifying to the feelings of his widow; adding, that Mr. Gibson had seen the committee, and fixed upon an appropriate site ; I have now great pleasure in placing in your hands Mrs. Huskisson's offer of that statue for the acceptance of the members of Lloyd's, and having been one of those friends referred to in her letter, who very anxiously desired to see that fine work of art and excellent representation of Mr. Huskisson placed where it will be often seen by many of those whose interests are so identified with most of the great objects of his public life, it is to me very grati fying to convey to you this offer.—l have the honour to be, dear Sir, very faithfully yours, (Signed) " A. MILNE. " George R. Robinson, Esq.;M.P., &c." " Carlton-gardens, Oct. 23, 1847. "My dear Sir,—l return to you, with many thanks, the interesting commu n i ca ti on w hi c h you have allowed me to peruse. It has afforded me much gratification in its connexion with the memory and fame of my husband, and forms, indeed, a strong induce ment for my following out the views of those friends who have suggested that a position in 'the vestibule of the new Lloyd's Rooms would afford a very appro priate site on which to place a statue of Mr. Has. kisson. " Circumstances have arisen which leave the ori ginal marble statue of Mr. Huskisson at my disposal, and to enable me to offer it to the acceptance of the members of , that most distinguished institution (Lloyd's), in which are combined all the leading in terests of that mercantile community which consti tutes the legitimate pride of our country. " The friendship which so long existed between Mr. Huskisson and yourself, and which you have as constantly continued to manifest in the execution of that trust which he had confided to your charge, added to the numerous instances which I have my self experienced of your kindness and considera tion, naturally cause me to look to you on an occa sion so intimately connected with the memory of my husband, and to consider you on every account as best qualified to bring the subject before the proper authorities. I venture, therefore, to place myself in your hands, and to request of you to take the neces sary steps for bringing my offer before the distin guished body to whom that proposal more especially refers. °• I remain, with the highest esteem, my dear Sir, most sincerely yours, (Signed) " EMILY HUSKISSON. " To Alexander Milne, Esq., &c." " Lloyd's, October 28, 1847. "My Dear Sir,—l have great pleasure in trans mitting to you a copy of resolutions unanimously passed by the committee for managing the affairs of Lloyd's, to whom I communicated your letter of the 25th instant, together with an inclosure, addressed to you by Mrs. Huskisson. " These resolutions will, I trust, be gratifying to the feelings of that lady and acceptable to yourself, as the intimate friend of her late husband. " The talents and devotion of Mr. Huskisson to the service of his country are universally acknowledged; and his views and opinions are no longer matter of speculation but of history ; for it is remarkable that, whilst he possessed the faculty of comprehending the views and sentiments of others, he exhibited an extra ordinary facility of explaining with the greatest clear ness and precision his own. " If I may be permitted to express my own indivi dual opinion, I should state that I entirely agree with the author of his biographical memoir, that he was far from being slavishly addicted to fanciful theories ; and a careful examination of his measures will suffi ciently prove that they were grounded wholly on the principles of practical knowledge or of paramount necessity. He never attempted to assert that our re strictions and prohibitions should have been unneces•• sarily removed, and the interests of this country sacrificed to an idle display of spurious liberality.' " The name of Mr. Huskisson will be associated by the future historian with the changes which were considered necessary by the Government and Legis lature for the time being, in consequence of the altered circumstances of this country and of other States, after a long and eventful war. My own decided im pression, founded upon a long Parliamentary acquaint ance, and from an intimate knowledge of his recorded views and opinions, is, that had his valuable life been spared, he would have devoted the energies of his powerful mind to the promotion of a liberal and reci procal international commercial policy, and that this was deemed by him perfectly consistent with the pa ramount duty of supporting and maintaining the vital interests of the agricultural trade, commerce, and navigation of the United Kingdom and its dependen cies, as indispensably necessary for the defence and prosperity of the country. " You will readily believe, my dear Sir, that I feel much gratified in the opportunity afforded me of paying my humble tribute to the memory of an en lightened and distinguished statesman, whose loss was universally deplored by his fellow-countrymen, and who in his private life was esteemed and beloved by all those who had the happiness of sharing his per sonal friendship. "In communicating the resolutions to Mrs. Hus kisson, I beg you will do me the favour to convey to that lady the assurance of my sympathy and sincere respect. "Believe me, my dear Sir, faithfully yours, (Signed) " G. R. ROBINSON. " Alexander Milne, Esq., &c." Extract from the minutes of the committee for managing the affairs of Lloyd's, October 27 : " The chairman having read a letter addressed to him by A. Milne, Esq., dated 25th instant, and also an inclosure from Mrs. Huskisson to Mr. Milne, under date of 23d idem (vide copies), it was una nimously " Resolved—That this committee do accept on be half of the members of Lloyd's, the marble statue of the late Mr. Huskisson offered by his widow, and that the chairman be requested to convey to that lady, through the medium of Mr. Milne, their high appre ciation of a work of art, not only as the production of an eminent native sculptor, but especially so as an unenduring memorial of one, who devoted talents of the highest order to the service of his country, and who in discharging the functions devolving on him as presiding over that portion of the Government con nected with the trade and commerce of the country, evinced at all times an earnest desire to promote the welfare and prosperity of every class of the people throughout the British empire. "That it is considered by this committee that the statue of the late Mr. Huskisson may be most appro priately placed' in the vestibule of this establishment, forming part of an edifice devoted to commerce in the centre of the British metropolis. "That a copy of these resolutions be transmitted to Mr. Milne, for presentation to. Mrs. Huskisson, and that the resolutions and correspondence on the subject of Mr. Huskisson's statue be placed in the under writing and merchant rooms in the establishment." NAVAL INTELLIGENCE. PORTSMOUTH, Nov. B.—The appointments for the officers of the Victory to be turned over to the Blen heim steam guard-ship came down yesterday. The Terrible's defects are being made good at this port with much dispatch. The engineer department in this dockyard, so ably presided over by Mr. Andrew Murray, is worked night and day to get through with the work which is now so pressing at this port. We have seen the time when one-half of the engi neering work at present going on at this port in steam machinery would have caused a reinforcement of artisans from Woolwich to have been sent down, at a great expense of transit and maintenance ; but matters are better managed now. The Centaur steam-frigate, the Frolic and Helena 16-gun sloops, and the Champion, 18, and Serpent, 16, are quite ready for commission at this port. The Comet steam-vessel received her fourth com mander this day, Lieut. Rigge, late of the Trident. WooLwicu, Noy. 8 —The Virago steam-vessel, Commander John Lunn, arrived at Woolwich, at eleven o'clock to-day, from the Mediterranean station, and last from Portsmouth, and is to be paid off here. The Stromboli, steam-vessel, Commander Fisher, is ordered to be paid off here on Wednesday, the 10th instant, and she will be commissioned on the following day by Commander Lord A. W. Beauclerk. The Violet, Dover steam-packet, was taken out of (lock to day, and the Dee, steam troop-ship, Master- Commander Driver, taken into the dock to be examined. The Cyclops steam-vessel has had her steam up to-day to try her engines in the basin. Thirty shipwrights are to be hired to complete the Justitia and Wye convict-ships, as the shipwrights on the establishment in the yard have so much work on hand. THE SCOTCH MEMBERS:We have every reason to believe that a better understanding is about to be come to, respecting the mode in which Scotch business or Scotch affairs shall be intro duced and conductedin Parliament, than has ever been ado p ted since the Refo rm Bill came into existence. T his, certainly, is very much to be desired ; and we Are sure the notification of it, and still more the realisation of, it, will be received and bailed with great satisfaction by our countrymen.— Scotch Reformer Gazette. COURT OF ALDERMEN. Yesterday a Court was held, immediately before the new Lord Mayor was sworn into office, for the dispatch of the last remaining business of the Mayoralty. THE CONVICT MARY ANN MUNT. Alderman MooN, as one of the visiting magistrates of the gaol of Newgate, presented to the Court the following communication, which he had received from Sir G. Grey "Whitehall, Nov. 6. " Gentlemen,—With reference to the case of Mary Ann Hunt, the convict under sentence of death in the gaol of Newgate, in which case the Sheriffs, for reasons reported to me, directed that the execution of the sentence should be delayed, and afterwards, by command of her Majesty, the capital sentence was respited until further order should be given, I have the honour to inform you, that, under the special cir cumstances which have occurred in this case, her Ma jesty has been pleased to command that that sentence should not be carried into effect. I request that you will communicate to the prisoner this information. " The prisoner will be detained in Newgate until after her expected confinement, when the commuted punishment will be notified.—l am, gentlemen, your most obedient servant, _ " G. GREY." Alderman MOON said the Sheriffs had made the communication to the convict as soon as possible after it reached their hands. The communication was ordered to be entered upon the journals. SUNDAY TRADING. The following report was brought up and read " In obedience to an order of this lion. Court, of the Bth day of June last, to consider the report of the Inspectors of 'Weights and Measures for the last year, we, your Committee for General Purposes, do certify that we proceeded therein, and directed the inspectors to visit their districts upon some Sunday, and report their observations as connected with Sun day trading ; and having subsequently received a re port from them thereon, we have annexed the same to this our report ; and having procured copies of the minutes of evidence taken before a Committee of the House of Commons on the subject of Sunday trading, which have also been presented to the several mow hers of this Hon. Court, we considered the subject, and are of opinion it is not expedient for the inspectors to exercise the duties of their office upon Sundays within this city." Sir P. LAURIE said the committee had recom mended that the inspectors should not be directed to inspect the weights and measures of tradespeople 0 0 Sundays, because to employ the inspectors in such e manner would be sanctioning Sunday trading by the authority of the Court of Aldermen. lie would tell the poor, however, for their government, that the shop` keepers who traded on Sunday were the grossest or all the impostors with whom they could come il l contact. Alderman COPELAND owned that there were diffi' culties to be contended with in the matter of Sunda,' trading. He was not for preventing the poor fre? getting nece:saries on Sunday morn i ng , bui : oe wished that the trading should cease at nine o'clocir• The report was agreed to, and a report was pre' sented to the Court, stating that Mr. Teague, th e principal clerk at the Guildhall Police-court, had re signed his situation. The resignation was accepted. The Court then proceeded to discuss some matter s of no public interest with closed doors. PILCHARD FISHERY. NEWQUAV.—Large shoals of pilchards were see n off Towan Head on Tuesd a y last, and it is belie ve d that they were passing to the westward. Some bun' dreds of pilchards were, taken amongst the herring s ; but no shoal has been seen in the bay. f ST. IVES.—On Monday last thi s bay was fn.. ° pilchards, and the numbers inclosed were as follows: —Wearne and Victoria Co., 7,000 hogsheads; o°- litho and Co., 7,000 hogsheads; Union Comp an y , 3,000 hogsheads ; Hitchens and Co., 4,000 hogshead s ; Tremearne and Co., 700 hog s head s ; Hocking se' Co., 200 hogsheads ; Faithful Gleaner Comps,,TT 2,000 hogsheads ; and the N ew Gl e a n er, 100..---".. ° weather is now very fine, and it is hoped the grea ter part will be saved, but as the quantities are so large , it is quite uncertain. POUTHLEAVEN.—Considerable quan tities of fi sh were taken ,by the driving b oa t s of this port on Monday and Tuesday last, and some fine shoals were seen on the same days off Porthleaven. Fish wer e nd also seen from the look-outs at Gunwallee Mullion, but too deep for the seans to enclose. The seans at both those ports are manned, and ready for inclosing, as also around the coast at Cadgwith, West Briton. RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS. LIVERPOOL, NOVEMBER 8. STOCK EXCITANGE.—The 'sales are—Birkenhead, ,Lan cashire, and Cheshire Junction, 311. Sh ares (l a t e C. an d 1 1 .0 14%—London and North-Western, 153%—Ditto Quar ters (G. J.), 36 3 / 4 —London and South-Western, '651 / 1 1-, r Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, Quarters, No,;_;..' p.—Ditto, Preference, p.—Midland Stock. 09 1..., Ditto, 40/. Shares, 41—Ditto, Halves, 17i dis.— Nutt h.„mih tish, Halves, 11 1 b—North Staffordshire, Union, 201 c.—Shrewsbury and Chester (late N. Vi r .,f ei y, 1 1 dis.—South-Eastern and Dover, 27 3 % c.—Ditto, No. 1, 6 dis.—Ditto. No. 4,48 s. 9d. dis.— York, Ne wc otto and Berwick (N. and B. Extensions), No. 2, P Mid (G. N. E. Purch.), 6 per cent., IA p.—York s and t:?.E A land (East and West Ridi ng Extension), 6 p .-- P Rouen, 35. atriS MANCHESTER, Nov. 8. L a ncashire , STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are--East carters, 5 dis.—Ditto, New, 5 3-16 c . di s . —Ditto, New Qu!t•- - dis.—Huddesfield and Manchester (221. paid), 5 r Thirds, 1 9-16 dis —Lanc as hi re an d Y or kshire, dis—Ditto (West Riding Union), 2% dis.—Lond on t s North-Western (Manchester and Bi rm i ng h a m), Q uflr h - re (A), 3 9.16 p.—North Staffordshire, 9-16 dis._shroPszli6 Union, 2% dis.—South-Eastern and Dover, No. 4, 2 6 per dis.—York, Newcastle, and Berwick, Preference (guar. " cent. till 1850), 1 / 2 3). 7 -Ditto, Extensions, N 0.2, ja P' LEEDS, NOVEMBER .8 'te STOCK EXCHANG E .—The sa l es a re —East Lan ce b e i ra: New, 4J dis.—Ditto, Quarters, 16s. c. dis. —Great N °l.l 4sitW 6 dis.—Lancashire and Yorkshire, Fifths, 13s. dis- - 1 0 (West Riding Union), 525. dis.—Leeds and D en 'ais ti -- - Branches (blue), 20s. dis.—Leeds and Thirsk, 1 7 c " p - re . fe" Ditto, Preference, 31s. dis.—Midland, 107 1 / i—Dit t° ' -staf rence, 2s. dis.—North British, Thirds, ss. dis.—Nortb fordshire, 7s. dis.—North-Western, 4% dis. castle, and Berwick, No. 2 (New Berwicks), 1 5 s• P . SHEFFIELD, NOVEMBER 8. ru 06 01 STOCK EXCHANGE.—The E t e sales are— ls er go• (York Extension), 2 dis.—Great Northern, 6 clis; -- 1 % —York, .L 1 cheater, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, Quarters, No . " —North-Western, 4 1 ,4 dis. EDINBURGH, NOVEMBER 6. A feral. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Dundee anu• Quarters, 46s.—Edinburgh and Glasgow, 90 e . s r o ther li ; Ditto, Halves, 12 1 4 ex div.—Edinburgh an d Newport. s%—Ditto, ditto, New, Reg., 235. 6 u,' r ters Northern, 31s. Gd. —North British, 2514 —Ditto, wl,rhiris, 79s.—Ditto, New Quarters (scrip), Bs. 6d.—Ditto, 5 buri Reg., 31s.—Scottish Central, 21% ex bonus.—SbreW and Chester, 101. share (8 per cent. guar.), 90s. o.llWig THE ALLEGED CASE OF POISONING AT MORCHARD.—further Committ a l s . The county 035,,g• , ass trates have been again o ccu pi e d w ith a lengthene d : ii Lrd tigation connected with the su dd e n death of w e— t Fisher, at Cruwys Morchard. Our readers will recolleS, that a few weeks since, Ann Fisher, wife of the deceasetuti was committed for trial, on a charge of causing his de l 'e, by poison. On Wednesday, at the office of Mr. 0 Sharland, clerk to the magistrates, at Tiverton , her Leach, her reputed paramour, and Mary Hodge , t o sister, were examined on a charge of being accesO r i t he the murder. The examination lasted from ten lotted morning until late at night, when both were colointhe for trial, ,and taken on the following morning to County Gaol at Exeter, in the custody of a ss dent Harford, whose vigilance and activity in t bio the have been unceasing. Mr. Tanner, the attorney A f° :d o 0 prisoners, being absent in London, his clerk atto n "' 01 3 their behalf, but was excluded by the magistrates-lrer such strict privacy was the, enquiry conducted. tern Times. BIRTHS. batcb, E A ' On the 25th of Sept., the lady of A. C. Cumber Consul-General at Constantinople, of a daughter- , W s ' On the sth inst.. at G eorge - street, Euston-square-' Palmer, of a son. On the 6th inst. at Hyde-park-gate, Kensing ton Gore, the lady of James Pratt Barlow, Esq., of a daugli f t e ; %teuni' t. On the 4th inst., at Athl one , t h e l a dy of ' Le of Colonel Ricketts, Royal S co t s G rays, o f a daughter.. e f ife v On the sth inst., i n J o h n - s t reet, B e df or d-row, " I William Grimwood Taylor, Esq., of a son. la dy Of ° s r On the sth inst., a t R a thk ea l e , Li mer i c k, the tain Charles h Norris, t64th ile R y egiment, of a son. ma O st i e t r t o h f e the 6t C h i s ty t7 otLo l n a d d on o S f School, nevf- Dadr. Mortimer'aughte head MARRIED. the l el'. On the 2d of Sept., at Baddagarma, Co' ion' JO ° Edward Newman, of Palamoottah, South India. t?„.ijos' M P g Diary, eldest daughter of Mr. Lea id e Smith, Of el ter- row, London. 1-11 Deni On the 4th inst., at Coolock Church, near Dtiliog' e r y t ° Henry Rucker, Esq., jun., of Clapham-common, o,q,' Mary Antoinette, eldest daughter of J. D. WillieM s ' -scse ll On the 6th inst., at St. Peter's, Pimlico, Th °sl3- the .la te Cuddy, Esq., to Elizabeth, youngest daughter of Jo OnCort, th Esq in . ,ther. On the 6st., at St. Giles's, Camberwell, Jareesf7oberC wood, Esq., of Charles-square, to Keturah, widow' of Young, Esq., of Manor House, Bromley, Middlesex: ---- DIED. On the 25th ult., H a rriett, th e eldest daughte r of the ltits Mr. John Smith, of Streatham common, Surrey. garief On the 4th in s t.. a t G rove -t erra ce, Hammersmith, widow of the late Mr. James Davies aged 68. On the Bth inst., in the vestry of 'his c hurch, "' Li- Spitaltields, the R e v. R. C. D.D., aged 52 ' daughter °f On the Bth inst., at Holloway, Eleanor, second daub the late Anthony So ulb, Esq. aged 30. Ch ar l" On the n 6th inst., a y t Po;tman-street, P oWell Blackett, Esq., surgeon, R.N. aged 60. a ged d 6 j ( i . On the 7th inst., in Islington, Mr. Richard Bull, '4:110 of On the 7th inst., in Spital-square, Mr. Le Mare, On the 7th inst., Frederic Thomas, youngest street Gillery Pigott, Esq. On the Bth inst., at Brook's-wharf, Upper Thame s Charles Niven, aged 60. YOGICG!iI London : Printed and Published by MURDO No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Offi thce, co 7 no , of Strand, in the Precinct of the Sa vo y , in Middlesex, Tuesday, November 9, 1847.