The Sun.
London, England, 1841-12-10 00:00:00

LLOYD'S SHIPPING.

LONDON, DEC. 9.—Wind this day, at noon, westerly.
DEAL, DEC. B.—Wind W.N.W.—Arrd. Hebden, west-
ward; Pomona and Ralph Wylam, Newcastle, for Africa.
Arrd. from the River, Herschel, Jamaica.
LIVERPOOL, DEC. B.—Wind W.S.W. to W.N.W.—
Arrd. Hermes, Oliphant, New York; Paragon, Montreal,
with part of cargo thrown overboard ; Brookshire, Bar-
clay, Quebec. Arrd. off, Douro ; Governor, James,
Rio de la Hache—sailed Oct. 28.
BEAUMARIS.—Arrd. St. Mary, Liverpool, Jamaica.
PORTSMOUTH, DEC. B.—Wind W.N.W.—Arrd. off,
Fort William' China—sailed June 10 ; Galatea, Madras.
COWES, .DEco B.—Arrd. Saladin, M`lienzie, Valpa-
raiso, with loss' of bulwarks, &c.
SWANAGE, DEC. B.—Several portions of materials have
been saved from the Wreck of the Edward, of Granville.
WEYMOUTH, DEC. B.—The stern board of a vessel,
marked Juliana, Hamburgh, has been picked up at Port-
land.
SALCOMDE, DEC. 6.---Arrd. Lily, River de COUR.
PLYMOUTH, DEC.. B.—Wind W.N.W.—It has blown
a gale at W.N.W. all night, and continues.
FALMOUTH' DEC. 7.—Wind W., strong gales and
squally.—Arrd. off William Hunnington, Miramichi,
with decks swept. Put back, Braganza steamer, for Vigo,
with boilers burst. The cargo of the Orient is landing
with all possible despatch ; the water in her hold has
been reduced to 2 feet.

JERSEY, DEC. 6.—Arrd. Rollo, Messina Christiana,
White, Quebec.
SCILLY, DEC. 7.—Two boats marked on the stern
Hero of Dundee, Patrick, were picked uphere 26th Ilk.
SWANSEA, 7.—Arrd. Juliet, Signet, Valparaiso; Maria
Hurdy, Jobson, Cuba.
CLYDE, Dze. 6.—Arrd. Matthew Ray,. St. John's,
'New Brunswick ; Perthshire, Pictou; Halyards, Deme-
rara ; Romulous, Quebec.

WATERFORD, DEC. s.—Arrd. Perseverance, Newport,
with loss of sails, bulwarks, cargo shifted, and leaky.
STROMNESS, DEC. 2.—The William, of Stockholni, for
Brazil has been repaired, and will proceed.
Hula., DEC. B.—Wind W.—Arrd. , Richard, Shields,
with loss of foretopmast.
OFF LOWESTOFFE, DEc. Maria and Elizabeth,
Stonchouse, Richibucto.
YAnmourn, DEc. B.—The smack Defiance, of Green-
wich, whilst lying to oft' Croiner yesterday, was run fuul
of by the Alert, of Whitby, and sunk ; crew saved ;
the latter was run ashore on Wednesday leaky.

HER MAJESTY'S SHIP AVON.—The para-
graph which has been the round of the papers is incor-
rectly stated. It was her Majesty's steam skip " Driver"
that got on the rocks near Flamborough Head, and would
in all probability have been lost had it not been for the
timely assistance rendered by two large steamers belong-
ing to the General Steam Navigation Company, viz.:—
The Leith, on her passage to Edinburgh, and the Lon-
don Merchant, going to Newcastle. We are happy to
state that by the powerful aid of these two vessels the
Driver was got off without damage.
GOLDEN INDIA,—Such had been the accumu-
lation of the precious metals and stones in India,
where the mines are indigenous, that it is generally
estimated that Nadir Shah, in 1740, carried away
not less than 400,000,000/. or 500,000,0001. ster-
ling ! In Jahanqueir's autobiography he relates that
a golden platform around his throne weighed forty
tons ; and that his throne and diadem were worth
4,000,0001.! When he married his minister's daughter,
he presented her with as many lacs as amounted to
7,000,0001., and with a necklace of forty beads, each bead
costing him 2,000 E The province of Beran on one
occasion, furnished about 4,000,0001. of gold; and the
same Sovereign spent besides nearly 2,000,0001. on the
tomb of his father Akbar, which formed one of the won-
ders of golden India.

HUNTING DEER.—The hunting-deer are very
curious, and Ido not remember to have seen them in
any other part of India. A large male antelope is
trained to walk quietly among a herd of wild ones, one
of the males of which immediately comes out to fight. The
tame one having ropes twisted in a particular manner
among his horns, soon manages to entangle his antago-
nist, and the moment he finds he has done so, he throws
himself on the ground and anchors the other until people
come up and secure him.—Capt. Fane's " Five Years in
India."
The murrain has again made its appearance in
several places in the neighbourhood. On one farm, not
far off, cats stealing milk were attacked.—Dumfries Times
About ten o'clock on Tuesday night a person
of gentlemanly address, and enveloped in a large Mack-
intosh, stalked into the Sugarloaf Taverp, No- 31,
Bell-yard, Temple-bar, and, , addressing , Mr. Maton,
the landlord, requested that he might be accommo-
dated with a bed for the night. Mr. Maton assented,
and having ascertained that one of the bed-rooms upon
the second floor back was disengaged, desired the servant
to show the gentleman to it. He (the gentleman), how-
ever, instantly, but politely, objected to whack room, and
said that he cared not if it were in au attic, provided Mr.
Almon could accommodate him with a front roomwas he was
so fearful of fire, having not long since, when sleeping in a
back room, narrowly escaped with his life from its ravages.
Anxious to oblige, Mr. Maton at length arranged for him
to sleep in one of the front rooms on the second floor,where
he was left for the night. About 11 o clock, however,
Mrs. Maton and the barmaid, who happened to be alonveeirn,
the bar, were somewhat surprised atgraetentreapopitetaernaenscse,
of their new lodger, who, with the
said he hoped they would not close fora few minutes,p as
he had forgotten to make a call in the neighbourhood.
lie was told that they should not do so until twelve o'clock.
He assured them he should be absent only a few minutes,
but in order to secure his bed he
The stranger, of course, never
ee,
for he
rest.h
would. then pay for it.
rasosoims assistance cveeroyf anun
fiatccporeturnqd, for, with the
adltrewn dase eesdtritph;edeb bed-
room
every thing portable,
sheets,
al
l had blankets,
disappeared,
ing passed from the window, as was supposed, into some-
adjoining house.

-RELIEF FUND.
_.We
'Wales'W e understand that the Prince
Fund formllthe poor of the city, has reached nearly
3,000/. ; which prove a great boon to our distressed
working population during the winter, as it is to be
distributed
meal, potatoes, and coals.—Edinburgh
Observer.
CASE OF DESTITUTION.
On Wednesday
week, as a carter was passing on the road betwixt Tren-
tham and Hanford, he saw lying on the road side what
appeared to him a bundle of rags, but_which proved to
be a poor woman, about SO years of age, almost dead.
To a gentleman passing by at the time she stated that
she was on her way from Manchester, where she hadburied her husband, to Birmingham, and that she had
endeavoured to obtain relief at Newcastle, but it was
denied to her ; and that being compelled to proceed, she
was taken with an ague fit on the preceding evening, and
had lain on the road all night. The gentleman kindly
forwarded her to Stone.—Stufrordshire Gazelle.
DISTRESSED COMPOSITORS.—Distress amone
the London printers is raging to a frightful extent, not-
withstanding the exertions made to alleviate it. By an
advertisement. in our paper, we see their more fortunate
brethren in London have subscribed nearly 300/. Sub-
scriptions have also been raised by the trade in various
parts of the country, and the example may be .wortlil"of
imitation among the journeymen of this town. We hope
the liberality of our townsman, Mr. Henney, will
be emulited by others.--Cheltenham,Examiner.

►✓M/

ViTJPA

,SUN

LAW INTELLIGEIVCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY, Dec. 9.
IN THE MATTER OF PLUMMER, A BANKRUPT.
The LORD CHANCELLOR stated that in this case, in
winch he had given judgment yesterday, but ieierved
the question of costs, he was of opinion that there
ought to be no costs on either side.
TOLEDO V. VIETA.
This case stood on the paper to-day upon an appeal
motion, from the judgment of the Vice-Chancellor of
England.
Mr. RICHARDS, shortly after the sitting of the. Court,
asked permission of the Court for it to stand over gene-
rally, on account of the death of the Duke de/ Infantado,
whose committees, under the Spanish law, had filed the
bill.
The LORD CHANCELLOR granted the application.
BOOTH V. CRESWICK. •
_ _

•
Mr. STUART replied to-day in this case, the arguments
on which hare already occupied the Court three days.
The case came before the Court upon an application to
re-hear a decree pronounced by Lord Cottenham in
August last.
The LORD CHANCELLOR, at the conclusion of the ar-
guments, said he should take time to consider his
judgment.

ROLLS COURT. Dec. p.
SMITH V. JEYES.

This was a motion, on affidavit of the plaintiff, for the
appointment of a receiver of the moneys belonging to the
business carried on by him in co-partnership with the
defendant, as solicitors in Chancery-lane, and to wind up
the affairs of the partnership, which had been dissolved
by the plaintiff on the ground of direct violation by de-
fendant, of the articles entered into by him with the
_ _

Mr. Pemberton, Mr. Parker, and Mr. Romilly appeared
for the plaintiff, and Mr. Kindersley and Mr. Wright for
he defendant.

SMITH V. JETES.

Mr. PEMBERTON, with whom was Mr. Parker and Mr.
Romilly moved for an order to have a receiver appointed
of the debts due to the partnership which had subsisted
between the parties in this cause, with power to wind up
and settle the affairs of the partnership.
It appeared that in the year 1835 the defendant, ivho
had long carried on business as a solicitor in Chancery-
la ne, entered into partnership, for a term of ten years,
with the plaintiff, and that articles of partnership were
executed between them, by which it was stipulated,
among other things, that for the first five years of the
term the defendant should provide two-thirds of the ca-
pital necessary for carrying on their business, and the
plaintiff one-third, and that for the remaining period the
capital should be subscribed by them in equal moieties ;
and after a number of directory clauses, providing, for
sebsistence-money, it was provided, that if either party,
without the consent of the other, should' 'withdraw, or
take any of the money, effects, or propertY,"*hiCh, for
the time being, belonged to the partnership, other than
or besides what he was thereby authorised so to do, then
and in any such case it should be lawful for
the other of them, within thirty days after the
discovery, to dissolve the said partnership, by
giving notice thereof in writing, and that immediately
after such notice had been given the said partnership
should cease, and be void to all intents and purposes.
The partnership thus constituted between the parties
continued until the 21st of August last, when the plaintiff
served defendant with a notice of its dissolution, and
took possession of, and removed from the offices, all the
books and papers belonging to their business. The
grounds alleged for this step, and for the present motion,
were, generally, that the defendant had directly violated
the covenants entered into by him with the plaintiff in
the articles of partnership, by not bringing into the busi-
ness his stipulated share of capital; by taking away from
the business capital by which the business ought to have
been carried on, and appropriating it to his own pur-
poses ; by misapplying moneys received by him on
account of the partnership, and giving no ac-
count of the same; and by refusing to concur with the
plaintiff in acts necessary for carrying on the business of
their partnership. Several acts were alleged in the bill
as committed by ,the defendant, and constituting the
'breach of contract ; but the three following were
chiefly relied on in support of the motion. First,
that on the 28th of August, 1840. the plaintiff
had remitted to the defendant, from Liverpool, a note
for 50l for the purpose of paying the expenses of certain
witnesses necessary at a trial about to take place at the
Assizes in that town, and that defendant had not so
applied the money, but had received and not accounted
for the same, whereby one of the clerks of the firm had
been obliged to borrow money of the plaintiff's brother to
defray the witnesses' expenses. Secondly, that defendant
had received the sum of 541. 9s. 10d. from a Mrs. Eliason
on account of the partnership, and had neglected to ac-
count for it until some timemfterwards, and thirdly, that
defendant had received the sum of 5561. Ss. Bd. on ac-
count of the partnership, and for the purposes of paying
the same ton gentleman named Stolle, in exchange for the
conveyance of certain lands, to be sold by a decree of
the Court of Chancery, and had drawn a check for
the amount, and handed it overto a clerk of the partner-
ship to be so exchanged, but the conveyance not being
prepared after the clerk had gone several times for it, the
defendant had again obtained the check, and received
the amount, and applied it for his own purposes. The
bill also charged the defendant with improper behaviour
towards the plaintiff, with neglect and mismanagement
of the business; in proof of which it was, among other
things, alleged that the proctors 'of the parties having
applied to them for payment-of their bill, and threat-
ened to take proceedings uWeis it was forthwith dis-
charged, the defendant caused several copies to be made
of this letter, and sent to clients who were indebted to

the partnership with a letter to each requesting
that their accounts might be immediately paid to enable
them to meet their proctors' demand. Under these cir-
cumstances it was contended that the plaintiff was justi-
fied in dissolving the partnership and entitled to the re-
lief prayed for, with the costs of the motion.

r. KINDEItSLEY, with whom was Mr. Wright,
stated that the defendant in his answer alleged that in
the year 1835, having been many years engaged in
carrying on an extensive and lucrative business, and
being desirous of being relieved from its labours
and anxieties, he ha taken the plaintiff into
partnership for the purpose of conducting his business,
and had provided that he himself should not be called
upon to interfere with it further than should suit his own
convenience. It had been for many years his practice
to require from his clients annually payment of the
sums expended by him on their account, which generally
amounted to from 60 to 65 per cent, on the bill of casts,
and that consequently before plaintiff became his partner,
he had never had any deficiency of capital for the pur-
poses of his business; but that after plaintiff had under-
taken the management of the business, he had neglected
and refused to require payment from his clients accord-
ing to the custom of his office, whereby they became
greatly indebted, and great - difficulty was incurred in
procuring payment of their debts, and in obtaining funds
for carrying on the business of their office ; and that
having thus formed a connection, and ingratiated him-
self personally with the clients, the plaintiff had at-
tempted to dissolve the partnership between them, with
a view to defraud defendant of his business. Defendant
denied that he had committed any act in violation of the
articles of partnership from the date of the
notice of'dissolution, alleged that the notice was conse-
quently null and void, and the partnership still subsisting.
With respect to the three articles mainly relied on by
the plaintiff. Defendant alleged that having received the
note for 50/., for the purpose stated by the plaintiff, he had
expended 81. there in endeavouring, to subpoena the wit-
' nesses, and to tender them their expenses, but without suc-
cess, and that, although he had lett town with the balance
before the witnesses departed, there was, nevertheless,
sufficient funds at the office to pay their ex-
penses, and , that he had not attempted to con-
ceal the receipt of the money, but had made
a memorandum of it, according to the custom of the
tinnoy.v 1 ed
That,ge d
with
a respectletter
to
Mrs.efsoehr ft
doEh
four
done
aaoospnropenfir ,ovspeoi
appropriation
jam days ai
os
dn
afterctronufteati
this
se,a
sum
hadau
nhmde
receivedthttolhffilaaeedct sp,cui
fnaireceived
omittedplaintiff
1.9 t
it, but oet °bnru re
moreover,
tetvt fromhee fraero tthi following
na:l
andas tahte
that
tececlin and still is,
would not have constituted a
breach of the articles of partnership, as there
v,
according to d due to him for
the terms of the arti-
cles, a sum of 1,200/. With respect to the sum of
time,
subsistence money,
tss6l. Bs. Bd., defendant alleged that the sum could not
be paid to Mr. Stone, as the payment was dependto
made, and
upon the Master's report, which was not
that thinking a cheque for so large nott f
from
tom
remain in the hands of the clerk,
from Mr.
him on the very day on which he received
D -
mith notice of the dissolution of partnership.
refused o sign
Pendant also denied that he had .
'n, on the busi-
ness of the partnership until
ipmla
tor
and with respect to the proctors
fendantonfdthleetoteffirces;
onlycommunicated it to
the firm in order to sa-
tisfytwo friends who were indebted
aired payment. 'The answer
laorbriel rent
them they really.d required ail
iin
alleged lseugi end o ft
hle4tol.; hed u e tdoroc't
also contained detailed
it might be dismissed
the bill, and that
alle-
gations in prayed replies to the several other
with eosts.
The case was not concluded at the rising of the Court.

VICE CHANCELLORS' COURT, Dec. 9.
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.)
THE ATTORNEY.GENERAL C. THE GREEN VVICII RAILWAT

COMPANY.

esslyn'sers of
At-
earli,nafotrtmhaetrioezliatfiiolnedofbythehecromMmaji
Southwark,Pnveen against the Greenwich Railway Company.
At-
torney-General,
the Eastern Division of. the Borough of
t o TileCis-object of the application was to restrain the de-
fendants from proceeding with their works upon a largo
area of ground in the neighbourhood of Tooley-street,
Bermondsey-street, and the Broadway, in the borough
of Southwark, to the inconvenience of the public, and
et!:
et ai n publicothoroughfares. n
o The
t hei
Commissionersrference
o with certain
of f fu grievances
the part
of the Company. The first grievance was, that the clnplaCom-
pany had lately purchased land with a view to widen
the line which they had originally constructed ; and se.
cond that they had not originally constructed the rail-
way to the extent of the land they had purchased,
and that they appropriated the residue to certain pas-
sages or commttaientions; the third, that a passage had
been improperly: constructed through a place called
Griffith's-rents; inkthe fourth ;grievance complained of,
was that they had VOA constructed, according to the terms
of the Act of Parliament, a bridge over Bermondsey-
street. The case had come before the Master of the
Rolls, on the sth of September last; but, as it appeared
that the COmpany were then about to apply to Parlia-
ment for aßill to extend their powers and to enable them
to construct in the neighbourhood in question six dis-
tinct lines, his Lordship ordered the case to stand eve
for the purpose of enabling the Company to carry their
Bill"through Parliament, on condition that they entered
into an undertaking by their Counsel to appear
before the Court, and to • abide by whatever