The Sun.
London, England, 1841-07-29 00:00:00

groundlessness of such an assertion by referring to the
authority of a publication that ranks highly with
agriculturists as well as with the corn trade, viz., the
Mark Lane Express. This authority, we may remark,
is the more unimpeachable, inasmuch as the Express
is a staunch advocate fur the Corn-laws, the sliding
scale, and wholesale protection tO the domestic growers.
Our private opinion is still in favour of nearly an average
yield, should the weather yet prove favourable ; but .as
to.the erroneous impression which seems to prevail in
soma quarters, that because the crops a few miles round
London have a satisfactory appearance, the same must
necessarily be the case in Scotland or Ireland, or even
the North of England, the idea, on the face of it, is too
absurd to need refutation. The remarks as to the limit-
ed stocks on hand, the lateness of the harvest, in fact
every line of-•the following extract from the Mark Lane
Express of yesterday evening is worthy of attentive pe-
rusal

" Even under the most auspicious circumstances, it is
now exceedingly doubtful whether wheat can yield air
average, either in regard to quantity or quality.
" Iu this situation it becomes a subject of vast impor-
tance to ascertain how we are really situated with regard
to stocks, and whether,' should these prove inadequate
to our wants, sufficient corn could be procured from
abroad to make up the deficiency. With regard to
the first question, we can only repeat what we have
already asserted, viz., that the quantity of wheat held
by merchants, millers, &c., is trifling in the extreme ;
and after the most careful and extensive inquiries, we
have reason to fear that though farmers may per-
Imps still hold about as much as at this time last
year, they would be ill prepared to afford supplies,
should the harvest -be long protracted, or prove deci-
dedly short. Considerable importations from abroadwould,
therefore, if such should unhappily occur, be required. It
remains now to be seen from whence these can be ob-
tained. The constant demand from this country during
the last three years has nearly cleared out the old stocks
at those ports of the north of Europe, from whence we
are usually in the habit of drawing our supplies, and
the utmost we could expect from the Baltic and
Hamburgh would not exceed 700,000 quarters. In the
Black Sea good stocks are held, and Canada and the
United States would also have some quantity to spare
should we really require it ; and as there are now about
500,000 quarters under the Queen's locks, in the different
ports of the United Kingdom, there are fair grounds to
conclude that, if foreign aid should be needed, sufficient
might be procured to make up any ordinary deficiency.
We sincerely trust, however, that we may not be driven
to this extremity, nor do we as yet feel any serious ap-
prehensions,, being convinced that one month of really
fine hot weather would remedy most of the injury the
growing grain crops have hitherto sustained."

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY, July 28.
HARMAN V. JONES.

The arguments in this part-heard case were resumed,
and concluded to-day.
The case came before the Court upon appeal from an
order of the Vice-Chancellor, restraining the Commis-
sioners of Sewers, from taking a portion of the ground
on which the Sun Assurance Company are erecting their
offices. The case for the Commissioners of
Sewers was opened on Monday by Mr. Richards
and Mr. Lloyd, and yesterday Mr. K. Bruce,
Mr. Wigram and Mr. Pole were heard in support of the
injunction. They contended that the Act of 2d and 3d
Victoria, which gave the Bank of England power to pur-
chase and remove the church of St. Bartholomew, and
the four houses built on its glebe, gave the Bank power,
at the same time to do what it pleased with the
land, provided that it left so much as would make Bar-
tholomew-lane of the width of forty feet. The powers
of the Commissioners of Sewers to interfere with that
land were taken away, and the Sun Assurance Com-
pany, for which it was well known the Bank of England
negotiated, had now full authority to make what kind of
erection they pleased on the ground in question. No-
thing, indeed, could be more unjust than the conduct
of th Corporation of the City of London, with which
in the present case the Commissioners of Sewers were
identical, for they refused to make the improvement
themselves because they did not think the public in-
terests imperiously required them to undergo so large
an expenditure as the improvement would require of
them, and now, when another party undertook it, and pur-
chased, the land and buildings at an enormous outlay,
they wanted, through the commissioners of sewers, to
step in and take a portion of the ground, which they al-
leged to be necessary for the improvement of the foot-
path. The Act gave them no such power ; the Trea-
sury had refused to interfere ; the Committee of the
House of Commons, to which the matter was referred,
had also declined to second their views ; and it. was
hoped that the Court would not attempt to give their
assistance. when it was expressly sworn that the
Assurance Company had already voluntarily given
up many feet of most valuable ground, of which
they should not have been deprived ; and when
it was also sworn that the taking away of the portion
now demanded by the Commissioners of Sewers would
prove a great injury and inconvenience, and so materially
alter their plans us to- render the offices too small for the
extensive business to be transacted in them. The Vice-
Chancellor, after a most attentive examination of the
Acts of Parliament, was clearly of opinion that, with
repect to the particular piece of ground in question, the
powers of the Commissioners were taken away, and in
that opinion he had restrained their further proceedings.
Mr. IticHARDs this morning replied to the whole of
the arguments, and _ _

ThW LORD aIIANCELLOR shortly gave judgment, or-
dering the motion to stand over, in order that the plain-
tiffs might have an opportunity of considering whether
they would try the right of the Commissioners of Sewers
under the Acts of Parliament, to do what they asserted
they had aright to do, either by an action of an ejectment.

ROLLS' COURT, July 28.
THE CORPORATION OF ARUNDEL V. HOLMES.
Nearly the whole day was occupied by Mr. Pemberton
in his reply in this case. At the conclusion,
His LORDSHIP laid the case was certainly a very
important one. The question was as to the jurisdiction
of the Court in the case. He would look over the papers
and endeavour to form his opinion before the recess. He
would give notice of the time he would give judgment.