The Sun.
London, England, 1849-11-23 00:00:00

TILE S U N, LON DON,

Ditto, Half ;Shares 25 .•..•• •...•
Do. Quarter Sh,ro!=... 12%
Lancaster and Carlisle... 50

Ditto, Thirds
Lancashire Yorkshireloo
Do. do. M. B. 4 8... 98
Ditto, ditto
Ditto. V Shares ...... 49 .....
Do. Quarters 231;4 ......
D 9. Fifths.— lO
Do. Thirds ....—........
Do. New Guarant;ed
6i er Cent.. .. lO ....•• . ..... ..."••••
Do. Liverp. and Bury 49
Ditto (HtidAerstield
and She'. ).. 5O
Do. (W. Riding Union) 10 ......
Do. (Preston & W pre)
Shares (A)... 10

Leeds and Bradford , 60
Leeds and Thirek 50
Do., Prefer., 6 per Ct. o .
Po., do. No. 2 5
Do., do. No 3 5 ••• ........
Do., Pref. Quar ,18 IS 9
Liverp9ol, Crosby ,t.od
Southport . lO
' ondon & Blackwall...l 11. 68. 3d —
Gar don, Brighton, and
South ..... 100
Do., New 51., guaran-
teed 6 per Cent...:.100
Do.Guarant. o per ct.. t
Do. I'refer. 5 per cent. 50
Ditto ditto-- 18:)2 ME)
radon and Greenwich 12/1584d...
Ditto. Preferer,. .20 . —
~..00dc.n and N. Wftitern 100 .....112% 113 111%
Ditto, N.,w Quarters.. 12
Ditto, Eft',
Do. 40/.Bhares(L.M.) 55
Do. 104 (M. & B.) C. 1 .....
Lond.& s W,st9en ....• 50 .... 31 30%
Ditto, New 501. ......
Do New 401. 34
•

Do.. New Scrip, 1848,
Pref. 7 per Cent. .. 6
Londonderry&Coteraint. 25 -. ....... ........
Do. % Shares ~... 5 - ........ •••• • oil.
Londonderry and Emus-
ki;h-n.. -
Do. 1/4. Shares
Lowestoff guar. 4 per ct 20 .......
Ditto (6 per ct.)

t‘lanchesiei,liuxton,and
Matlock... - •.
Manchester, Sheffield,
and Lincolnshire —100
Do. Quarters (No. 1) 25
Ditto ditto (No. 2)... 25.

D 0.% Shares (No. 3) 12 4 - ...._
Do. New 101. Pre.... 10 -
Ditto, Gt. Grimsby ... 50 - ••...... ......
Ditto ditto . ......•.. 20 ....•• - •••••••••.•••••
Ditto ditto ...... 121,4 - ...... ........
Ditto Sheffield and
Lincolnshire 25 . ... -
Do., Grimsby Dock... 25 ..... . -
Do. Manchester and
Lincoln Union..... 41.2 a. - -
hi6lind ...... ....... - 100 ...... 47%%
Do. Consolidated Pref.loo
Do., do., 504 Sharon 30 ...
Do. Birm., and Derby 100
Do.Consol. Bristol and
Birming., 6 per ct.... 100 ..... 1201.‘ ..... ...
Ditto,Brist. & Glocstr. 42 ...... - ...... ...
Ditto ditto .... ....,. 22!. is. .. ... - ...
De.,ErewsshVal.,Pref. 50
Ditto, Leieest.& Swan-
nington, 8 per ct.guar.loo -
Midland Great W estern
Irish 5O - ..... ....... ..
bliddlesbro' and Redcar,
6 per cent. guar.
Newcastle and Carlisle.loo ...... -
.bo. Quarters -
Newmarket .. .. . 23 -
Do. Extension
Newport, Abergavenny, .
and Hereford 6 .•..•• -
Newry and Enniskillen 7 - .. .....
Newry, Warrenpomt,
and Rostrevor 2O - •• ........ ••••
Norfolk ...... 100 - •
. • ••
Do. New 20/.
,-
Do. Guaranteed 5 p ct. 20 • - -... ...... . ...
Do. Guaranteed 51Arpe. 5 -
Do. do. W uveney % al. 2 ...... -
Northern Counties Union 4 ...... - ....
North 13ritish ........... 25 ..... 11 .....
Ditto, Halves .. -
Ditto, Quarters
Ditto, Thirds .... .. - .....
Ditto Preference
North Staffordshire ... 17% 8 73 ...... .....
North Wales . 3% - ••• ......
North-Western .... - ••.. ........ Doe
()Mead, Worcester, and
Wolverhampton -
[leading, Guildford, and
Reigate l5 ..... 1534 ..... ........
Royston and ilitchin - .. ..... ......
Scottish Central -
.. ..... ..•• ..
Ditto, New
Shrewsbury and 13irm... 12 ...... --. ........
Ditto ditto. Class B. 8 . ..... -
Ditto, New Guaranteed 8
- •• ••••••
Shrewsbury and lleretd. 4 ...... --

Shrewsbury & Chester
(Nor. W. Min.)
Ditto naives ... ditto 9 ......
Ditto Osweatry ...... 186 — •
Ditto New
Do. 8 per Cent. Pref
Shropshire Union
south Devon
Do. Preference
. %4%
South St/Worth-hire BIA 4 ...
South Easteru
Do., N 0.2.
Do., No. 3 .-..........30 ......
Do., Regietered No. 4 10 ...... -- ........ ...
Do., Scrip No 4 -
StAith Wales
3outh Yorkshire, Don-

caster, and Goole l2
Sk ?,ifield, Rotherham, &
Goole (N. Div.) Gua-
ranteed 5 per cent. ... 16% —
Do., do (Sou. Div.) ... 5
5 wane. & Loughor & Ca-
meron's Stni. Coal. ... 7
l'aw Vile Extension ... 8
fk&mes Ilaven Dock

and Railway ..... 17% ......
,'ale of Neath
Waterford and Kilkenny 20 .
Waterford and Limerick 47%
Waterfd,Wxfrd,Wicklw
and Dublin
Wear Valley 6 per Cent.

Guaranteed ..... 50
Do. do. do. 25
Do. do. do, ... 15 .....
Nest Cornwall ........ 6
hitehaven & Furness 18
Windsor, Staines, and
South Western ..... 14
Wilts, Somerset, &W ey-
mouth

45

38
t 64
97

lotA

111%
1214
814

3034

47X
”8

120%

6
7%

15%

.....
4%

1611

16%
loh,
2%

York, Newcastle, and
Berwick..... .
Do. Newcastle Eaten. 20
Do. li.S . k..Yr eterctice 8
Do. Ilartlepool Dock
anti Railway .. 100 ..— .—... ...... ...
York and North Midland 50
Ditto Preferencv ...... 10
FOREIGN RAILWAY:".
Anglo Italian (late Its-
hau and Austrian). ... 5k......
tioutogne and Amiens... 20 ......
Central of France (Or-
leans and Vierzon)... 20
Demerara ... ... 17%......
Dutch Rhenish ••••••••• 8 .... ..
East Indian .... 314 3% ..
Great Indian Peninsular o
Do. Do. ... .....10s..
Louvain ila Sambre ... 7% —
Luxembourg
Ditto
Madrid and Valentia... 2
Namur and Liege ...... 20 ... .. ... 6
Northern of France l4l. Es.— dis . 2% dis
Orleans and Bordeaux 7 ...... 2AI ........ ..... 2A,
Paris and Orleans
Paris and Rouen 2O ......
Paris and Strasbourg ... 12 ...... 6% 6li
Rouen and Havre ...... 20 .. 9A 9A
Samtire and Meuse 2O ... ..
Strasbourg and Basle... 14
Tours and Nantes l3 ...... ...
fournay, Jurbise, Len-

don, and Ilasselt ...... 20
West Flanders 15%
Ditto .....

18%
bh

3%

Anglo-Mexican lOO
Asturian Mining Com... 15
2845. ......
••
BA.aussgtorraaliva.n..g.;......... .. ......
Blaenarvon Iron & Coal 60 -•
Bolonos Scrip ...... .... ••••• ••
British Iron ..... .......... 12 ••••••
Brazilian Imperial ...... 24% —
BrazilianCotaei&Cuiabal3o ..... . 33/ ..•
, ,
•r ' Do. St. John Del Rey 15 ...... 1114
Cobre C.,opper ........... 40
General ................ .. 20
Real Del Monte, Unreg.
Do. Black Debentures
Do. Red Ditto ... ......
.....
Santiago de Cuba... lO
...... ....... ..... ••
United Mexican 2N ..............

3%
11;4i

LLOYD'S SHIPPING—(THIS DAY.)
LONDON, Nov. 23.—Wind this day at noon 8.8. W.,
light breeze and fine.
SHEERNESS, Nov. 22.—Wind S.E. to E.—And. 21st
Caroline, Harvest, Quebec,. .

DEAL, Nov. 22.---Wind S.—Arrd. from the River,
Woodbridge, Coppell, Adelaide, South Australia; Soun-
dravoroy, Angel, Jaffa, reported in the Gull stream.
PORTSMOUTH, Nov. 22.—Wind E.N.E. to s.—Ski.
Flora, Jamaica.
LivEnrooL, Nov. 22.—Wind S.—Arrd. 21st, Frances,
Page, Pictou. 22d, John Mattkie, Groom, Calcutta;
William Carey, Emmett, ditto; Lintin, ditto; Thomas
Brocklebank, I'onsonby. ditto, lett St. Helena 10th ult.;
Loodianah, Dallimore, St. Andrew's, New Brunswick.
Sld. 21st, St. Vincent, St. Vincent; William Soolie,
Beyrout. 22d, Nile, Lima; David Cannon, Steen
bland; Lady Hobart, ditto; Olive Branch, Boston.
Put back, City of Manchester, for Bombay, with loss
of jibboom cutwater, &?.., having been in contact with
the Oxford, which put back yesterday.
HULL, Nov. 22.—Wind S.E.—Arrd. 21st, Abram,
Grawcll, Davis' Straits.
FALMOUTH,
Nov. 22.—Wind S.S.E. to S.—Arrd.
2I St,
crewo uilig. got Sto Conero, Pacetto, London for Trieste, with lobs of
bulwarks, stanchions, &c., having been in contact with a
sot e.h.oeoner the previous night, off the Deadman, when two
Nov. 2 board2t.h_e svvdchiononer.E._
Arrd. John,
Hitehens, Quebec.
lennA
Yr Z4vV. 22,—Wind S,E.—Sld. Rosebud,
Algoa Bay,

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

CHANCERY.—(THIS DAY.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR heard appeals to-day; his
Lorsbip also gave judgment on the lunatic petitions
and apps al motion of-
THE MAYoR OF ROCHESTER V. LEE.
This case, cur readers will doubtless recollect, came
before his Lordship some considerable time since, upon
an appeal motion frem the judgment of the Vice-Chan-
cellor Knight Bruce refusing to grant a new trial. The
suit arose out of a claim made by the corporation against
the defendant for tolls on coal landed at Rochester. The
Court below directed an issue "to trylwhether the mayor,
aldermen, and hurgesses of the city of Rochester, as
owners of the port of the said city, were on the 7th of
August, 1845, law fully entitled to de flitted, have, receive,
and take the fee, toll, (r reward of 3d. and ..ne half of
a hafting for each and every ton weight of coals brought
by eater to and unloaded within the said port of the
said city, payable by the person or persons bringing such
coals by water in any ship or vessel to and unloading
the same coals within the port and city, for the weigh
ing of coals, or being ready end willing to weigh them."
The issue was found for the defendant generally and
specially, " that the corporation were not owners of the
port of the city of Rochester, and were not entitled to
the due claimed by them on coals imported for sale, but
not for consumption, for the weighing, or being ready
and willing to weigh the same." The trial took place
before the Lord Chief Baron and a special jury, and the
application for a new trial to the Vice Chancellor Knight
Bruce was founded upon the ground of the verdict being
contrary to evidence and a misdirection on the part of the
Learned Judge. Upon the motion coming on before the
Court below, his Honour observed that it had been said
that the jury ought to have found their verdict simply in
the affirmative or negative, and not in the special mannor
in which it was entered on the posies. He did not, how-
ever, think that this was a reason for granting a new
trial, nor did be think that the corporation could con-
tend that the verdict which they had succeeded in
obtaining against another party, named Levi, establishing
the right to toll, ought to weigh with the Court in de-
ciding the present motion. The latter judgment could
only be considered as conclusive against the parties to
the action. He must not be considered as pronouncing
any opinion whether the claim of the corporation to be
considered as a part was not well founded in law. He
was perfectly convinced that such was the meaning and
intention of the jury. Considering the nature and ex
tent of the evidence produced upon the trial, he ought
not to accede to the present motion unless the Learned
Judge's charge was defective or otherwise objectionable.
He had carefully read that charge, and was unable to say
that the corporation was entitled to complain of it in that
respect. lie did not perceive that any matter of tact had
been withdrawn from the attention of the jury, and he
had left them at liberty to draw their own conclusions.
The Learned Judge had told them plainly that there
was some evidence of the existence of a port within the
meaning of the issue, but that, in his view of the case,
the evidence was insufficient to sustain it, opposed as it
was by that which had been adduced in support of the
negative. This also was his (the Vice-Chancellor's)
opinion of the effect and force of the evidence, both oral
and documentary. He must refuse the motion, the de-
fendant's costs to be costs in the cause. He had after-
healed from the Lord Chief Baron that he was well
satisfied with the verdict. When the case should come
on for hearing, if equity should require that the bill
should be dismissed, it would probably be right to pre-
face the dismissal, or that the dismissal should be accom-
panied by a declaration preventing, it poss:b!e, the ver-
dict from having an undue effect. From this
judgment the parties appealed to this branch
of the Court, and upon that appeal the -Lord Chancellor
now gave judgment. His Lordship, after going at some
length into the judgment, stated that in his opinion the
best course to pursue would be to order the appeal mo-
tion to stand over, giving liberty to the parties to bring
such action as they might be advised, thereby treating
the question involved in the case as one solely of law
and not of equity.
The Court then proceeded to hear lunatic petitions,
none of which possessed any features of the least public
interest.

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
BLENKINSOPP V. BLICNKINSOPP.
The reply of Mr. TURNER in this case occupied his
Lordship the Master of the Rolls the whole morning.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DA►Y.)
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR OP ENGLAND.)
Unopposed causes, petitions, short causes, and
cause petitions occupied his Honour the whole day.
(Before the Vice-Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE.)
His Honour 11115 occupied the whole day with hearing
cause and bankrupt petitions of no general interest.
(Before the Vice-Chancellor Wianax.)
THOMPSON V. ROPER.
The further arguments in this part-heard case occu-
pied the Court the whole morning.

EXCHEQUER.—(THIS DAY.)
(Sittirg. in Banco..)
THE QUEEN V. JoBLING.
In this case a rule, calling upon the Sheriff of North-
umberland to show cause why a writ, in the nature of a
melies inquirenduin, should not issue against him, was
obtained on behalf of the Crown by the Attorney-Gene-
ral, on a former day.
Mr. WATSON, on behalf of the defendant, showed cause
against the rule this morning. He said there was a
writ of extent issued, at the instance of the Crown, on
behalf of Greenwich Hospital, against the defendant,
for a debt of 1,6771. The writ of extent was tested on
the s:h of June in this year, and directed the sheriff of
Northumberland to find what lands, goods, and chattels
the defendant was possessed of in that county. The
sheriff held au inquisition, and then made a return of
nulla bona to the writ. The Crown had since made an
application for a medies inquirendum, on the affidavit of
an officer of Greenwich Hospital, who deposed
that on the inquiry before the Sheriff of North-
umberland it appeared that Mr. John Cress.
well Jobling, the defendant, had executed a deed
of all his effects for the benefit of creditors on the day
on which the writ of extent was isiwd, which was an
act of bankruptcy. His (Mr. Watson's) answer to that
was, that although before the teste of the writ of extent,
namely, on the 2d of Juno, Mr. Jobling executed a
deed of assignment for tho benefit of all his
creditors, that that deed was executed by a
creditor and accepted by a trustee on the
2d of Jane, so that it became a valid
deed of assignment for the benefit of a creditor.
It was not alleged that the deed was a fraudulent
transaction. The defendant assigned all his property
for the benefit of a creditor, and the creditor assented
to it, and afterwards a fiat of bankruptcy was issued
against the defendant.
Mr. Baron PARKE was of opinion that the bank-
ruptcy was superseded by the issue of the writ of
extent.

The COURT concurred in this view, and directed the
rule to be made absolute.—Rule made absolute ac-
cordingly,

BAIL COURT.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Justice PATTESON.)
Mr. Justice Path. son sat at Nisi limos this morning
and disposed of a number of undefended cases.
(Before Mr. Justice EaLE.)
Mr. Justice Erie afterwards sat in Banco, and beard
several motions which, with the following exception,
presented no feature of public interest.

WILSON ♦ND ANOTHER V. LEEDS AND THIRSIC RAILWAY.
Mr. ATHERTON moved for a rule nisi calling upon the
defendant to show cause why the award in this case
should not be set aside on the ground of irregularity.
In June last, Messrs. Wilson and Benson, the contrac•
tors, agreed to refer certain matters that were in dispute
between them and the Leeds and Thirsk Railway to
arbitration. The matters bad their origin in a contract
for the execution of certain works, dated as far back
as the 14th of June, 1847, and which was made
between the East and West Yorkshire Junction
Railway Company, and Messrs. Wilson and Benson.
By the contract deed, Messrs. Wilson and Benson under-
took to complete certain works, including a viaduct over
the river. Nith, at Knaresborough, and to uphold them
in good repair for a period of twelve months. The Leeds
and Thirsk Railway Ccmpany had an interest in the
maintenance of this viaduct, and hence they had been
made parties to the reference. When the viaduct had
been partially constructed, and considerable progress
had been made in the work, it gave way, and one of the
principal questions to be decided by the arbitrators was
who should sustain the loss of the accident. The arbi-
trator had found that the loss amounted to 8,4501. 45.,
while he had directed the amount to be made up in this
way-3,291/. 75.10 d., to be paid by the Leeds and. Thirsk
Railway Company ; 2,3191. 12s. by the East and West
Yorkshire Junction Company, and 2,8191.45. by the con•
tractors, but stipulated that the contractors were
only to pay 1,833/. in money, but they were to supply the
balance by giving up all claim to the ruins and plant of
the viaduct. It was contended that the arbitrator had
no power to make such an award, and therefore it ought
to be set aside as bad in law. There were, however,
two other objections to the award—in the first place, the
arbitrator, who was the engineer to the company, and
to the vice of whose plan the accident in the viaduct
was attributed, had directed that the viaduct should be
rebuilt by independent parties upon a new elan, which
he clearly had no power to do, inasmuch as the con-
tractors were under agreement to complete the viaduct
and maintain it for a given space of time; but supposing
the arbitrator had that power, his award was bad for
not being Emil, which was the second ground of ob-
jection. It did not dispose of the covenant and respon-
sibilities the contractors bad rendered themselves liable
to by signing the deed, and upon these thrte grounds it
was insisted that the award was invalid and ought to be
set aside.
Mr. Justice ERLE granted the rule upon all points.

SECONDARIES —(ill IS DAY.)
(Bt fore Mr. Secondary POTTER.)
lIIRAYBON V. BUDINER.
The plaintiff in this action is a wholesale stationer in
Lawrence Pountney-lane, and defendant is a paper-
hanger at Yarmouth. The action was brought on a
promissory note for 171. los. Id.
Defendant pleaded that he did not make the note, and
also payment.
Plaintiff's clerk was examined to prove the de-
fendant's handwriting to a letter. Ile bad, however,
never seen the defendant write.
The Learned SECONDARY did not think this sufficient
evidence.
Mr. Sherwood, (plaintiff's attorney) then said be
could prove that he wrote a letter to defendant, and re-
ceived one in reply, and, he; had no doubt that the
signature to the bill was that of the defendant.
The SECONDARY expressed his doubts whether he
could allvw Ur. Sherwood to give evidence after he bad