The Sun.
London, England, 1836-05-09 00:00:00

LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, MAY 9 1816.

THE MARKETS.

COUNTRY CORN MARKETS DURING LAST WEEK,

Wheat. ' Barley. ' Oats. 13c:,11,. I Pease
II
Per Quarter. s. to LI s. to a. s. to 5. s. 5. to s.
C.lllisle . 49 26 . 37 29 —He xam 134 44 25 21 16 22
M frpeth 44 4S 22 23 -18 22 34 35 31 :,10
Penrith i at I 30 23 33
Sheffield 52 37 22 43 39
Winchester I 714 52 23 31 20 22 42 44
Per iinshel. i s.d. 6.4. s.d. R. 5. d. s. d. 5.4. s. ds d. $.(l
Carmarthen 6 6 68 30 33 16 20 00 00 00 00
0 0 7 0 3 4 00: 2 0 2 6 5(3 0 0 0(1 0 0
Newcastle (Staff.) 6 0 69:3 6 4 0 0 3 4 5 0 5 3 0 0 0 0
Northallerton (3 0 73 3 6 461 3 3 4 0 5 6 60.0 0 0 a
Stone . 80 8(i 4 0 4Si 3 0 3 4 6 0 6 7 0 0 00
Swanvea 6 0 70 36 46 2(i :30 00 0 00 00
Warwick 8 U 90 3 0 46' 2 0 3 5 6 61' 0 0 00
Pcr Poll. j
Oarnardcastle.— 120 136 00 86, 5 4 6a 8(3 160 76 80
Durham l2 0 13 0 7 0 801 5 0 6 6 7 6 66 7 6 8.4
Richmond...— 11 (I 12(3 76 BOi 5 (.1 74 .9 0 96 00 uil
Stockton 10 8 11(1 (I 9Oj 4 8 50 7(3 8(: 00 n
WAKEFIELD CORN MARKET—May 6
Wheat, Red, Norfolk and Sutlidk —s. 435. to —s. fine 45a.
Lin. and Cam. —s. 40i. to —s. fine 475.

WAKEFIELD CORN MARKET —May 6
Wheat, Red, Norfolk and Sutlidk —s. 435. to —s. fine 4gs.
Lin. and Cam. —s. 40i. to —s. fine 475.
Yorkshire..... —s. 425. to —s. fine 4.54.
White -...
--- Foreign, tied —s. —s. to —s. fine —s.
White —s. —s. to —s. one —a.
Barley, Norfolk and Suflblk .... .. 184. to 31s. tine 375.
Lincolnshire
Yorkshire Wold ...:.....
Foreign
Beans, Old . ....... :375: to 425. tine —b.
--- New 365. to 375. tine —I
Oats, Potato —s. to 20s. fine 265.
Poland —s. —s. to tOs. fine 'At.
Friezland and Sine_ —s. 1.64. to IBs. tine 20,

Mealing
Shelling
Malt 3rs tine 40s. per Load.
Rapeseed

SCOTCH MARKETS.

Oats.

BeAns. 1

IS ,to to 32 to 33
16 IS 20 24 35 I;1*
16 IS 21 24
IS 22 22 26
20 25 30 31
16 20 23 30
20 26 32 33 —3!
17 19 22 25 --
2tl 23 45 IS 43
20 22 22 •25 -
ies throughout the country.

MARKET
Ls of Grain to

C.—May 4.
3-day, and UP

le sales were

CHANCERY COURT-SATURDAY.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. LUBBOCK.
The LORD CHAticELLoa, at the sitting of the Coiirt,
gave judgment in this matter, which related to the con-
struction of the 6 Ist and 62d orders with reference to the
price to be charged in the Master's Office on account taken
by the direction of the Court. The accounts in the cause,
which arc very extensive, had been entered in the book in
the Master's Office; but not appended as a schedule to the
report, and the question to be determined was, whether the
defendant could be charged for a copy of the account thus
taken at the same price as the report itself—namely, two
shillings a folio, or at the- price of only sixpence a folio.
The importance of this question to the parties in the pre-
sent instance, as well as its importance in the way of pre-
cedent to the profession and the public, and its effect also on
the fee fund, had ihduced his Lordship to consult the Mas-
ter of the Rolls, and the Vice Chancellor before he deter-
mined it, and be found those Judges agreed with him in
opinion, that under the orders referred to, accounts so
taken, and not appended to the report, were to be charged
at the price of sixpence per folio, but the accounts, when
copied from the Master's book, to be only sixpence.

BARRET V. HOWARD.

This was a motion for a new trial of an issue directed by
the Lords Commissioners. The bill was filed in 1833, and.
prayed the specific performance by the defendant of a con-
tract for the purchase of a house at Tunbridge Wells.
Miss Howard, the defendant, had agreed to purchase the
house at 6501., and authorised her brother to complete an
agreeMent for that. sum ; but, on examining the title, it,
was found that the hOuse was liable to the ground rent of
two other houses, included in the same lease of the ground
Landlord.' This discovery was made in London by the soli-
citors to whom the title deeds were sent ; but on their pro-
posing to increase the amount of the ground-rent and reduce
the purchase-money to 4501., and give the defendant a power
to distrain on the adjoininghouses, in the event of the ground-
rent remaining unpaid, Mr. Howard consented to sign the
agreement on the part of his sister. When the agreement so
concluded was forwarded to Miss Howard she refused to
ratify it ; and the question in the cause was, therefore, whe-
ther the sister bad giVen her brother a general authority to
conclude an agreement for the purchase, or whether she had
merely authorised him to purchase on-the understanding
that the house was not liable for the ground-rent of those
adjoining. When the matter came to be heard the
Vice-Chancellor was of opinion that the defendant had
rendered herself liable, and that the plaintiff must have a de-
cree for a specific performance ; but Lord Lyndhurst
granted an issue to try the facts before a special jury.
This issue was tried before Lord Abinger, and the plaintiff
had a verdict; but on its appearing that an important wit-
ness named Rourke had not been examined, although the
order of Lord Lyndhurst had directed the examination of
all the witnesses, the Lords Commissioners Shadwell and
Bosanquet consented to direct a new trial of the issue. The
second trial was also before Lord Abinger, but with a com-
mon jury, and Rourke being examined, a verdict was given
for the defendant.

Mr. PLATT and Mr. BETHELL now applied for a third
trial, on the ground of misdirection by the Learned Judge.
The Loan CHANCELLOR, without hearing counsel in
opposition to the application, was of opinion that nothing
had bee❑ urged in the present instance which would war-
rant him in adding another trial to the expensii-e course of
litigation in which the parties had engaged. The motion
must be refused, with costs.
After disposing of some lunatic petitions, his Lordship
rose at two o'clock.

ROLLS' COURT -SATURDA Y.

COLYEAR V. THE COUNTESS OP MULORAVE.

The arguments in this cause were resumed this morning.
The facts are as follow : —The Earl of Portmore (then
Lord Milsington) on contracting a marriage with the daugh-
ter and heiress of the Duke of Ancaster and Kesteven had
sum of 38,0001., settled on himself and his wife jointly,
with a benefit of survivorship. Lady Milsington died, 'leav-
ing one son, Mr. Colyear. Earl Portmore, being in embar-
rassed circumstances, borrowed about 10,0001. of Mr.
Bruce, the army agent, to whom he assigned his interest in
the settlement. On the death of the Duke of Ancaster he.
left his large property to his grandson, Mr. Colyear—a
certain sum on his coming of age, and the remainder on his
arriving at. the age of twenty-five years. On his coming
of age, he entered into an agreement to pay his
fathe►'s debts, and filed a bill against Mr. Bruce,
and obtained a decree against him, ordering the re-assign-
ment of the interest in the settlement on the payment of
11,0001. Earl Portmore had some natural children, for
whom he was anxious to provide, and his son consented that
20,000/. out of the 38,000/. should be appropriated by him
for portions fer these children, and entered into an agree-
ment with his father to that effect. Mr. Colyear went to
Italy, where he was attacked by banditti in the neighbour.-
hood of Rome, and taken up into the mountains. His ser-
vants were murdered, and he was detained until be should
be ransomed, but died from the effects of the alarm caused
by. this circumstance. The money of the settlement was
invested in funds, which were. sold, and Mr. Sermon,
Earl Portmore's solicitor, received the proceeds, after pay-
lug Mr. Bruce the amount ordered by the Court, and at
the death of the Earl of. Portmore, Mr. Sermon had
19,0001. in hand, which the plaintiffs, the natural children
of his Lordship, claimed, in conformity with the before-
mentioned articles of agreement between the Earl and his
son. Mr. Sermon received notice from the Countess of
Malgrave not to pay this fund to the claimants, who conse-
quently filed their bill for the specific performance of the
agreement, to which the defendants demurred.
Mr. TINNEY, for the Countess of Mulgrave, suppoited
the demurrer.

Mr. PEMBERTON argued in support of the Bill.
Judgment postponed.

KING'S BENCH.-SATURDAY.

CRIMINAL INFORMATION AGAINST THE " MORNING
CHRONICLE."-THE KING V. BLACK AND OTHERS•

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL was instructed, on the part
of Fitzroy Kelly and lt. A. Dundas, Esqrs., the late
Members for the borough of Ipswich, to apply to their
Lordships for n rule to show cause why a criminal informa-
tion should not be filed against the printer and publisher of
the Mornin9sChrmielc, for a libel which appeared in that
paper on Tuesday last. On Monday last four persons
were brought up to receive judgment for having been guilty
of bribery at the last Ipswich election, and on the follow-
ing day a report of the proceedings appeared in the daily
papers: In the Morning Chronicle, however, there ap-
peared in addition two affidavits of Pilgrim and Barnes,
and which tended strongly to implicate Messrs. Kelly and
Dundas in the charge of bribery. On application to the
editor he refused to state his authority for inserting those
affidavits, and, therefore, these gentlemen found it necessary
to apply to the Court for protection against the charges which
they contained. The affidavit of Pilgrim stated "that before
he went to Norwich there was a conversation in the Com-
mittee-room amongst the parties engaged in the election, at
which Messrs. Kelly and Dundas were both present, as to
the purchase of doubtful votes, which conversation was in
the hearing of both Mr. Dundas and Mr. Kelly." Now,
if this took place, it tended clearly to show that both of
these gentlemen intended to corrupt the ends of justice.
Pilgrim's affidavit went on to state that Cooke requested
him (Pilgrim) to accompany him to the houses of voters to
deliver parcels, which he supposed to contain sums of money,
and that he had also seen Mr. Kelly at the house of Spar-
row, and that he had mentioned he had been delivering the
parcels by Mr. Cooke's direction, and that Mr. Kelly had
begged of him to continue his exertions. In the affidavit of
Barnes a similar statement was made, and parts were
• printed in italics, .which the Attorney-General read. Al-
though it was not the custom of the Court to grant crimi-
nal informations, grounded on the report of a trial, yet those
reports were not, for a particular political purpose, to injure
an individual.
Lord DENMAN—Take your rule.