The Sun.
London, England, 1847-04-28 00:00:00

MARKET NEWS.-(T HIS DAY.)

CORN EXCHANGE-WEDNESDAY
The arrivals of English Wheat have been tolerably good
this week, yet the show of samples here to-day was yby no
means large. All kinds moved off steadily at about .qon-
day's quotations. The best qualities of foreign Wheat were
held at full prices, but all other dei•icriptions met a .low in-
quiry. Most kinds of Barley, except the finest malting, were
a dull sale but not cheaper. The Malt trade was dull, at
about stationary prices. There was a fair trade doing in
Oats, at the late improvement in value. Beaus and Peas
were quite as dear, but Flour commanded very little at-
tentiou.

Irish...
Foreign ......

Wheat.
1,070 qrs.

ARR I VALS.
Barley.
120 qrs.

Oats I Flour
150 qrs. 6SO ,1
300 1 --
3,620

1,860

970
Malt. 2,680 qrs.
WHITECHAPEL.
Fair average supplies of e&ch kind of meat were on offer
to-day, yet the demand was steady at very full priers.
Beef, from 2s 10d to 3s 10d ; Mutton, 3s 10d to 4s 8d ; Lamb,
5s 4cl to 6s 4d ; Veal, 4s 2d to 5s 2d ; and Poik, 3s 10d to
5s per Blbs. by. the carcase.

CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
The Lord Chancellor sat in his Court at Westminster to-day.
mositianc V. ALSTON.-JUDGMENT.-THE NARROW V. THE

BROAD GAUGE.

The LORD CHANCELLOR gave- judgment to-day in
this case, which was argued before him a few days since upon
an appeal from the decision of the V ice-Chancellor of England.
overruling a demurrer, put in by the defendant, to the Bill
filed by the plaintiffs. We -have already given a length-
ened account of the facts of the case, and it will,
therefore, be unnecessary to repeat them here. His
Lordship, in giving judgment to-day, said, that this
was a case in which two persons, not alleging dis-
tinctly that they were shareholders in a railway
company, but describing themselves as such, had tiled a bill
in which they alleged, that owing to circumstances to which
it was not necessary his Lordship should further allude,
certain individuals who were originally appointed
directors ought to have ballotted out four of their
number and elected tour others ; that they had
omitted to do so, and that, consequently, they were not now
a body of directors, such as was contemplated by the Act of
Parliament ; and the bill prayed an injunction to
restrain thm from voting or acting as directors
of the Railway Company, and that they might be
ordered to place the common seal of the Company
the hands of six other persons, whom he alleged bad been
appointed directors under the provisions of the Act of Parlia-
ment, authorising the increase of the number of directors
from twelve to eighteen. The result, therefore, of
granting the injunction prayed by the Bill, would
be to restrain twelve out of eighteen of the directors
from acting, and permitting the whole duty of directors to be
performed by the other six. There was nothing in the Bill
praying the Court to set aside what might be an error,
but the Bill assumed that the whole twelve were illegally
exercising the functions of directors, and that they all
ought to be restrained. Great difilcultfarose with respect
to the construction of the Act, but upon that it was not his
intention to give any opinion, because in his way of viewing
the case he thought it to be his duty to allow the demurrer
without any reference to the Act at all. He thought it was not
within the jurisdiction of the Court to take that matter into
its consideration. Years ago there could be no doubt that
the present Bill was demarrable. The rules of the Court of late
years had been relaxed to suit modern times, but therelaxation
of those rules ought not, and never had been extended be-
yond the exigencies of the case itself. Now, in the pre-
sent instance, there was no case of necessity stated
in the bill, but the most obvious mode of cor-
recting the grievance discussed in the bill, were
to be found in the allegations of the bill itself ;
added to this, if such a bill as the present was permitted to
be on the files of the Court, every shareholder in every com-
pany, might file a similar bill, and the Court be inundated
with them. Even if there were no other objections to the
bill than the one to which his Lordship had adverted,
he thought that would be fatal, although there was no doubt
that that might be easily corrected; but there were in his
Lordship's opinion many other objections to the Bill. First,
that which was complained of by the Bill was not personal
at all to the parties who had filed it. What was the
complaint? Why a usurpation of the rights of the corpo-
ration, and it was prayed that the party that had done so
should be ordered to hand over the seal of the company to
the party whom they alleged were the proper
directors of the company. The case of " Foss and
Harbott le," decided by Vice-Chancellor Wigram was precisely
like the present, it was stronger, because there there was
malversation, and in that case the Vice-Chancellor Wigram
decided that the bill could not be supported, and in that
decision his Lordship perfectly concurred. In the
present case, for anything that appeared in the
bill, the Company might file a bill, and ask for relief as a
properly constituted body. The present was the first
attempt that had ever been made to call upon the
court to exercise a jurisdiction under such circum-
stances. None of his (the Lord Chancellor's) predecessors
had ever exercised such a jurisdiction as he was now asked
to do, and he would not be the first to adopt such a course;
the question in the case was, whether these parties
were proper corporate bodies ? Now, that was purely
a question of law, and not of equity. If his
Lordship was to grant what was now asked by the bill, it
would have the effect of putting an end to the railway com-
pany altogether. On the whole, without expressing any
opinion upon the merits of the case, his Lordship was clearly
of opinion that his duty was to allow both the demurrers.
Sir F. KELLY said that such being his Lordship's
judgment, the Court would, as a matter of course, order the
injunction that had been granted by the Vice-Chancellor of
England to be dissolved.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—Yes. The Court also ordered
the costs of the motion for the injunction in the court below
to be paid by the parties applying for it.
The court was crowded to excess during the delivery of
the judgment, and among those present we noticed i C.
}
Russell, M.P., Mr. Muntz, M.P., and Mr. Spooner, . .

EXCHEQUER.—(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
LEWIS V. VWCLEY.
This was a special case, arising out of a devise in a will,
and which came before the Court by the direction of Vice-
Chancellor Bruce, but the particulars possessed no feature of
public interest.

COMMON PLEAS.--(THIS DAY,
(Sittings in Banco.)
GRANDON AND OTHERS V. NEWMAN.

The Court was occupied nearly the whole of the morning
in hearing the arguments on a demurrer in this case, which
arose out of a bill of exchange, but the particulars possess no
interest but to the parties concerned.

BANKRUPTCY.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Commissioner EvANs.)
KNIGHT V. NYALMSLEY.
In this case the defendant was summoned under the Small
Debts Act, to show cause why he did not pay a debt of 31.105.
due for rent.
The defendant said he was unable to pay or make any
order as he had filed a petition in insolvency, and obtained his
protection.
Mr. HUGHES, for the plaintiff, contended that as the sum-
mons had been taken out before the schedule was filed, that
the protection would not stand against an order under the
Small Debts Act, as the plaintiff had not had r.otice of the
intention to apply to this Court, and if his Honour would
make the order, the plaintiff would take the responsibility on
himself of acting on the order.
His HONOUR said that he could not make any order in
defiance of the protection which was from all arrests fur debt.
The order was therefore refused.
IN RE D. :MACLEAN.
To-day was appointed for the adjourned last examination
of this bankrupt, who was formerly M.P. for Oxford. An
application, however, had been made previously to enlarge
the time for the bankrupt's surrender, and the business attic
day was pro forma merely.

SECONDARIES.—(THIS DAY.)
Before Mr. Secondary POTTER.
WILD V. NAY.
This was an action to recover the sum of 111. l Oc. for
one quarter's rent of premises in St. Martin's-le-Grand.
Mr. Tnomas appeared on behalf of the plaintiff, and
called witnesses to prove the occupation of the house ;
but a difficulty arose as to the production of an agree-
ment, as the plaintiff had not been able to find the at-
testing witness, although an expense of 6/. had been
gone to to get it stamped, so that it might be put in
evidence.
Mr. llonnv called a witness who happened to be the
one in request, as he admitted that he was present when
the agreement was made.
Mr. THOMAS said, that if the witness could have been
found, the case might have been tried without the extra
expense of the stamp.
The jury gave a verdict for the amount claimed.
There was only one other cause tried on an I. 0. U.,
which was undefended, and not of the slightest interest.

BOW-STREET.-(THIS DAY.)
William Medhurst, otherwise John James Parker, was
charged with stealing a prismatic compass, the property of
Mr. Curtis, civil engineer, of 14, Robert-street, Adelphi.
It appeared that the prisoner had called at Mr. Curtis's
chamfers to seek employment, being a surveyor. On Sa-
turday last, and shortly after he left, a compass which had
been seen safe on the sideboard a short time before, was
missed. Suspicion did not fall on the prisoner until Mr.
Swift, a pupil of Mr. Curtis, heard from Mr. Denham, ma-
thematical instrument maker, that a person whose descrip-
tion answered that of the prisoner, had sold a compass to
him which corresponded most minutely with that lost. He
then with some difficulty traced the prisoner(who had given
the name of Medhurst to Mr. Curtis, and Parker to
Mr. Denham, and had given false addresses to both),
and left a message for him, that if he would
call at Mr. Curtis's be would get employment. The prisoner
called and was taken into custody. He was immediately
identified by Mr. Denham as the person who sold the compass
to him.

Mr. Curtis, who alone can identify the instrument with
certainty, being out of town, the prisoner was remanded fur
a week.

MARLBRO'-STREET—(THIS DAY.)
William Macqueen was brought before Mr. Bingham
charged with assaulting a young lady of the name of Woods
residing at No. 6, Marlborough-road, St. John's-wood. ,
It appeared that last night, about eleven o'clock, the com-
plainant, accompanied by two other young ladies, were pro-
ceeding along Tottenham-court-road, when the defendant
went up to them, and seizing hold of complainant, exclaimed
" I'll have this one," and caught her up in his arms in such a
manner that she had the greatest difficulty in getting from
his unwelcome embraces. After a severe struggle, she at
length got away, when the prisoner again caught hold of her,
struck her in the mouth, and said he would give her in
charge for attempting to rob him. She then called a police
constable, and gave hint in charge.
and Mary Anne Jones, the two young ladies
with the complainant, corroborated
who
onn were Fur
in company
company
her evidence in every particular.
The defendant said, he was extremely sorry for what had
occurred. Ile was in liquor at the time, and did not know
what he was about.
Mr. BulcriAm said, respectable females were not to be
annoyed and insulted by every man who chose to plead in-
toxication as an extenuation of the offence. He should fine
him 31. fur the assault; and trusted that it would act as a
warning to him in future.
Harriet Wiltshire, a middle-aged female, was placed at the
bar, charged with intermarrying with George Baker, her
former husband, Thomas Willshire, being still alive.
George Baker, grocer, No. 3, Bruton-street, Berkeley-
square, stated that he was married to the prisoner at Stepney
Church, on the 11th of June, 1843. She had previously re-
presented to him that she was a widow, and that her former
husband had been dead for some years. Upon thoee repre-
tpettativng he rafted her.

The certificate of the former marriage was produced, and
the prisoner, who declined to make any a:,:,,wer to the chlrge,
was remanded till Monday next, in order to procure toe
attendance of the witnesses who were present At the marriage.

WORSHIP-STREET.---(THIS DAY.)
A SAINT IN TnouuLa.—Sergeant Teakle, of the II divi-
sion of Metropolitan police detective force, applied for and,
obtained summonses for the appearance at this Court, 01
Messrs. Meeking and Co., linen-drapers and silk-mercer 4
&c., of Holborn-hill, and Messrs. Williams and Co., 01
gent- street, also in the same line of business, under the fol-
lowing very peculiar eircumstances.
It appears that an individual, named William Travers
Heater, had obtained, in the capacity of town-traveller,
,
four pieces of silk goods, valued at 60/., from the firm of
Messrs. Brooks and Co., silk-weavers, Spitalfields, and that
the sale thereof was effected by Hunter at Messrs. Meeking
and Williams, as above.
Hunter, who is represented as an individual beloeging t°
the society called "Teetotallers," and who has also been re 7
cognised for his apparent piety and general good conduc.t
by the clergy of the district in which he resided, absconded;
and was traced by Sergeant Teakle to Liverpool, and founa.
at the " Temperance Commercial Coffee-house." The Pr&
sorier acknowledged having sold the goods to Messrs. Meet_
log and IYilliams. On being searched, a portion of 09
money, 25/. 13s. 6d., was found upon him.
Mr. Keane, clergyman, of Bethnal-green Church, s pokeio
high terms of the respectability of the prisoner, but Mr.
Broughton observed that he had a public duty to Perf°ring
it was well, perhaps, for the prisoner that he had suc
of
powerful friends. He, however, sat there for the purpose
at:ministering justice, and a worse case had not, perhaps'
come before his notice. The prisoner should be brought fIP
again, preparatory to his being fully committed to Nola°
for trial.

RAILWAY COMlfirrE
(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

GROUP VI.
SALISBURY AND YEOVIL, AND lEZ
YEOVIL, AND DORCHESTER.
Evidence in favour of these lines was received this
morning.
The tirst witness called was Mr. Higgins, of Co
c
who gave it as his opinion that the construction of a nd to
peting line with the Great Western Railway WOUld
a reduction of the fares, from the effects of which the 1 It.
bitants of Collington would reap their proportion of heaM.
Mr. T. Avery, merchant, of Honiton, and 3lr.Lee, of
ton, also gave evidence in favour of the line.

GROUP IX.
WEST CORNWALL (BRANCHES Ali°
IMPROVEMENT). • 00%
This Committee met to-day at twelve o'clock, but 11 the
diately afterwards adjourned, on account of a report 0 od
Admiralty having been received against the mode PrOcrieed
for crossing the river Hoyle. The adjournment was aiguni.
to, in order that the promoters might be able to cora•
cate with the Admiralty, to obtain, if possible, Bora° Inv--
cation of their decision.