The Sun.
London, England, 1863-11-16 00:00:00

Total loaded offfrom St. Petersburg,
Oct. 23, O.S
71,512 62,429 81,170
'
1,450 2,665
Do. after this date

Total at the close of the navigation

63,879 83,833
London
Liverpool —
Bristol
Other English ports
Ireland l7B 212 576
Scotland l6O 405 2,169
Germany 12,633 :12,008 11,898
France

Total 61,626 51,485 67,334

LAW INTELLIGENCE—This Day.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH
PARRY V. GREAT SHIP COMPANY. ti

In this case a rule had been obtained by the- plaintiff
against the company, on the ground that the ship had not
been kept insured according to the agreement of the com-
pany with the plaintiff, and therefore he had a right to seize
the ship, in satisfaction of a claim of £6,000 he had on the
company. The company contended that although the policy
of insurance had not been signed, various arrangements
had been made which NI as tantamount to an insurance
being completed.
Mr. M. Smith having been heard in support and Mr
Lush for the discharge of the rule,

iThe Court thought, under all the circumstances, the rule
must be discharged.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
BURT V. WILDE,

This was an action brought by Mrs. Burt, better known
as Miss Emma Heywood, against the defendant, Mr.
"Wilde, the proprietor of the Alhambra Palace, Leicester-
square, for breach of engagement.
From the evidence it appeared that an application was
made on the part of the lady for an engagement at the
Alhambra Palace as one of the leading vocalists, and a letter
was written by the defendant offering an engagment under
certain conditions, at the rate of £lO per week, for nine
months certain, the defendant to have the exclusive right
to tho lady's talent and abilities for that period on payment
of that salvage. As there were certain arrangement to be
made with respect to other pending engagements a corre-
spondence ensued between the husband of the plaintiff and
the defendant, but in consequence of matters not being
arranged Mr. Wilde withdrew from all further nego-
tiation. Miss Heywood contended that an en-
gagement had been effected with her, and that
the details were the only circumstances upon which a dis-
agreement had arisen, and that therefore she was entitled
to substantial damages for the loss she had sustained in
consequence of the act of the defendant. The defendant
contended that he had acted in a perfectly fair manner
throughout the whole negotiation, and' that he
had offered that the difference between them should be
settled by the arbitration of any person conversant with
the terms of theatrical engagements. This was refused,
and the present action was brought.

Witnesses having been examined on both sides,

The jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff—damages, MO.

SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr, Kerr.)

THE TRAFFIC REGULATIONS FOR THE CITY OF LONDON.-
LONDON GENERAL OMNIBUS COMPANY V. DYER.

This was an action to recover 305., damage to an omnibus.
The evidence went to show that there were a number of
vehicles in King William-street on a certain day, the whole
being " heads and tails." A general backing took place,
and the shaft of defendant's van went through the panel of
the 'bus,

Mr. Buchanan, for the defendant, contended that his client
was compelled to follow in the rank by the police,

His Honour—l must hold that the van was too close to
the vehicle before it. If the vehicles aro so close together
that there is no room for backing, I must hold that to be
negligence.

Mr. Buchanan—lf the drivers keep a respectful distance
the police order them to draw up.

His Honour—l cannot help the police regulations, but
when the parties come here they must take the conse-
quences. It is well known that in the City the traffic is so
close that these accidents are of constant occurrence.
Mr. Buchanan—But your Honour will see that we are
bound to follow the police orders.
Evidence was called to show that the present accident
might have arisen through a van blocking up the footway,
and his Honour held that the preponderance of evidence
was in favour of the plaintiff, adding, that it should be well
understood that where vehicles were so close together it was
negligence.
Verdict for plaintiff, with costs.
CONDITIONS OF SALE AT AUCTIONS.—SOLOMON V. THOMAS.
This was an action to recover for the non-delivery of cer-
tain machinery sold at a sale over which defendant pre-
sided.
Mr. Buchanan appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Beard
for defendant.

It was shown that by the conditions of the sale, a person
was appointed to decide all dis-
in defendant's then employ
putes.

His Honour held that the buyers must be bound by this
condition, and as the matter in dispute had been referred to
the person agreed upon, defendant must have verdict.
_

Verdict for defendant.

COURT OF BANI(RUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Goulburn.)

IN BE yEO.

IMPORTANT QUESTION AS TO CONDITIONAL ORDER OP

DISCHARGE•

Mr. Dowse appeared in of a rule calling upon the
bankrupt to show cause why he should not be committed
for non payment of a sum of money, as ordered by the
Court. The bankrupt was formerly a clerk in the Insol-
vent Debtors' Court, and subsequently became bankrupt,
and on the 22d May last
obtained his order of discharge on
consenting and undertaking to pay a sum of £4O per year
out of his pension for the gradual liquidation of his debts,
but bix months had elapsed and tho bankrupt had not paid
any portion, although frequently called on so to do.
His Honour said the first difficulty was whether the
condition being by "consent" of the bankrupt was such a
rule or order of the Court that the bankrupt could be com-
tuitted for disobedienca on non-payment. He thought not ;
but it did not follow that the creditors were without a re-
medy. The Court might be applied to on the ground that
the bankrupt was in contempt for non-performance of the
undertaking.
Mr. Dowse argued that the conditions formed part of
1"r of discharge, as it was fully set out in it,
--vod was heard in opposition.
Mr. S.. -,ltimately refused the application.
His Honour for costs, but the question was
Mr. Sargood
ordered to stand over. ""v give notice that he
Mr. Dowse then said he would of the Treasury
should apply for an order upon the Lomb due.
S on
might becon..
to pay any future instalments which

It was ultimately arranged that a formal applioatiou
the point should bo made when judgment was given a 4 to
Costs,