The Sun.
London, England, 1863-01-12 00:00:00

TPE' SU)', LOrqUON, MONDAY EVENING, JANUARY 12. 1883

MARKETS—This Day.

tationc Last week's import amounted to 3,670 bales from
Algoa Bay; 797 Sydney; 70 Adelaide; and 3,684 bales
from Taganrog.

r lB5B.
- - - -----1
Stock this day.... 2R.671
.. i 350.1 to
Price of Y.C.
( -s Od
Delivery last week 2,326
Ditto from June 1 70,835
Arrivals last week 18 )
Ditto from June 1 87,987
Price of Town .... 55s Od

1859,

1860.

1861.
41,787 74.527 52,076
58s0d to 5956 d to 41s Od to
58s ,d 59s 9d sdO
2,801 1,819 2, '67
53,412 56,931 8,5,529
699 514 931
83,, 18 101,366 81.844
60s 3d 61s 9d 500 9d

1862.

55,925
44s Od to
—s Od
1,656
51,557
2,956
89,173
468 6d

LAW INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

COMMENCEMENT OF TERM.

Hilary Term commenced this morning, the judges pre-
siding in the Courts.iat Westminster. Mr. Baron Wilde,
who, it will be remembered, was taken seriously ill at Liver-
pool some months ago, had so benefitted by his short resi-
dence at Malta, that he was enabled to occupy his seat in
the Court of Exchequer.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
(Before Chief Justice Erie, and Justices Keating,
Williams, and Willes.)
In anticipation that their lordships would deliver judg-
ment in the case of Kennedy v. Brown, the Court was
densely crowded ; but on their lordships taking their seats,
they at once proceeded with the ordinary business.
Mr. Macaulay, Q.C., made an application to the Court,
on the part of Mr. Field, for the postponement of certain
applications he had been entrusted to make, until next
term. The learned gentleman had met with a serious
accident, and was therefore precluded from attending the
Court.

Their lordships immediately granted the application.
WHISTLER V. FOSTER.

Mr. Edward James said this case was originally tried
before Mr. Justice Willes, when a verdict was given for the
defendant, with leave to move the Court to enter it for the
defendant. The trial took place on the last day of term
and was a case under the Bills of Exchange Act. The
cheque upon which proceedings were taken was for £97105.,
of which defendant was the maker payable, to a person
named Griffiths, un order, and endorsed by Griffiths to the
plaintiff. The question involved was whether a postdated
cheque could be sued upon, although it bore one of the
penny stamps. The cheque had been endorsed to the
plaintiff, who, it was alleged, had notice that the instru-
ment was tainted with fraud, and it had also been trans-
ferred atter the time it had been made payable.

The Lord Chief Justice said he thought there ought to
be a rule on the question, whether the law as it at present
existed did away with the penalty which was imposed
under the old law for issuing a post-dated cheque without
a stamp.
Mr. James said there was another ground on which ho
moved, which was, whether the plaintiff, being the holder
of the cheque, which, although not endorsed at the time it
was first posted, was deposited as security, and afterwards
indorsed by the payee, as holder for value received, was
entitled to recover.
The court granted a rule on both points.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Before Lord Chief Baron and Barons Martin, Channel],

and W ilde.)
BELHAVEN V. LITTLEJOHN

Mr. C. Turner moved for a rule to show cause why the
defendants should not ba discharged out of custody, he Lay.
ing been arrested on a ca sa upon a judgment in an action
brought by the plaintiff on the ground that the defendant
had, on the 11th of Nov., executed a deed of assignment
ander the 198th section of the new Bankruptcy Act, and on
the 17th of November it was lodged with the proper officer
for registration, but owing to the rules of the office, the cer-
tificate of registration was not obtained until the 20th. In
the meantime the defendant was arrested. An application
was made to Baron Martin at chambers, who, however, was
of opinion that be could not interfere, and referred the
parties to the Court of Bankruptcy. An application was then
made to Mr. Commissioner Holroyd, but he was of opinion
that he had no jurisdiction, and that the application must
be made to the District Commissioner at Exeter, and he
also declined to interfere, as the process under which the
prisoner was arrested issued from this court.
The court granted a rule nisi.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—This Day.