The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-09 00:00:00

COLONIAL.

The market for British Plantation has been dull, and
with a larger supply; prices have declined about 6d to
is per cwt.
REFINED.—This article is also heavy; Lumps, 55s 6d
per cwt.
EAST INDIA.-5,829 bags Bengal partly found buyers
at steady prices: Benares fine white 436 to 44s 6d, good
soft yellow 395, and fine brown 30s to 32s per cwt.
Penang, 274 baskets 156 bags 15 boxes went rather
lower; good damp yellow 36s to 36s 6d, low 32s to 335,
and good and fine brown 30s 6d to 31s fid per cwt. Mau-
ritius, 10,292 bags 180 casks sold 6d to Is lower, fine
yellow 41s to 425, good and fine brown 34s to 358 6d,
and very ord 29s to :30s.
. FOREIGN.—YeIIow Ilavannah mostly sold at 38s 6d to
40s for low and mid, end at 40s 6d to 42s 6d for good
and fine Molasses. There has been less demand.
COFFEE.—Jamaica good and fine partly sold at 77s to
115 s, at 49s to 70s for low mid to mid, at 37s to 46s 6d
for fair and fine fine ord, and at 30s to 36s for ord and
good ord. Ceylon has been cheaper; ord bold pale 308,
low mid 42s t0.;45s 6 l, fine ord 32s 6d to 365, and ord
27s 6tl per cwt, pea-berry 40a to 455. Mocha has been
decidedly lower; lair and good bold pale greenish long
berry 51s to 's4s. Rio has been at 331 to 35s for fine
fine ord, and at 30s to 33s for fine ord.
COCOA.—The market has been rather dull. Trinidad
38* to 42s per cwt.
RlCE.—Bengal has been taken in at 9s 6tl to 10s, and
some good mid and good white, rather dusty, has been
sold at 9s to lOs per cwt.
SPICES.—BIack Pepper has been taken in at 2-id to
2id per lb., and white at 4ifi ; clean Tellicherry has
realised 9-1-4 d per lb.; Pimento has been dearer, good mid
nd to 3-id per lb.
SALTPETRE.—CaIcutta has been 2s to 2s 6d per cwt.
lower; mid grey 8/ per cant. refraction 258 6d to 265.
1-Wm.—East India proof has been Is 4d to is Sid per
gallon, and Leeward Island Is 7d, being dell.

TrA.—The market has been steady.
COTTON.—There is but a limited business doing.
TALLOW.—P.Y.C. is 45s per cwt. on the spot.

CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
The Lord Chancellor sat in his Court at Westminster,
to-day, to hoar unopposed lunatic petitions, appeals, and
appeal motions.

IN THE MATTER OF NISBETT, AN ALLEGED LUNATIC.

Upon this petition being called on, the object of which
was to obtain a commission de lunatieo inquirendo
against a lady at Ytirmouth.
Mr. STUART stated that after the report of Dr. Clut •
terbuck, of which his Lordship was in possession, the
parties presenting the petition thought it the most pru-
dent course to withdraw it.

The petition was accordingly withdrawn, and the
costs ordered to stand over until a petition had been pre-
sented with respect to them.

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

KNIGHT V. MAJORIBANKS.

The further arguments in this case occupied his Lord-
ship the Master of the Rolls the whole day. The suit
was instituted for the purpose of setting aide certain
deeds executed in 1829 and 1836, by Colonel Peter
Augustus Lantour, under circumstances as alleged,
which in equity would be considered as atnounting to
fraud. The arguments have already occupied two days,
and appear likely to take up the time of the Court for
some days to come.

VICE-CHANCERY.---(THIS DAY.)

(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.)
His Honour the Vice-Chancellor of England was
occupied the whole morning with unopposed cause
petitions, short causes, and cause petitions.
(Before the Vice-Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE.)
Cause petitions of no general interest occupieJ his
Honour the Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce the whole
morning.

-(Before the Vice-Chancellor WIGRAM )
MONRO V. TAYLOR.

The arguments in this part-heard case were resumed
to-day. The bill was filed by a vendor against a
purchaser for the specific performance of the con-
tract. By a written memorandum, dated 'the
31st of July, 1845, the defendant agreed to purchase
Belmont House, Vauxhall, together with a plot of ground
adjoining, for 7,750/. The property was stated to be
partly leasehold, held under the Dean and Chapter of
Canterbury, and partly freehold. The purchase was to
be completed in the fillowing November, and on giving
up possession a formal agreement was to be executed.
The defendant was to take the same title as the plaintiff
received from the devisees and executors of the late Duke
of Brunswick. Soon after the date of this memorandum
the plaintiff applied to the Dean and Chapter for a re-
newal of the lease, when it was ascertained that they
claimed as leasehold a portion of the land which was
supposed to be freehold. The defendant required that
boundaries should be ascertained and defined, but the
plaintiff entirely failing to distinguish the boundary line
between the freehold and leasehold, the defendant re-
fused to complete the contract. The further arguments
oacupied the Court the whole morning.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)

COUNTY COURTS.-FOSTER AND ANOTHER V. TEMPLE

♦ND ANOTHER.

The defendant was the executor of a person named
Taylor, and was summoned to the County Court by the
plaintiff for the payment of a sum in which Taylor had
died indebted to him. The plaint called Taylor
" Thompson." TIT matter was referred to the Judge of
the Court (the Westminster County Court), who decided
that the first plaint was invalid in consequence of the
misdescription, and ordered a second one to be made out;
but before it was executed the Statute of Limi-
tations had run out in respect to the claim, as it
had been contracted more than six years before.
The Judge, however, considered that the proceedings
had commenced with the first summons, and decided
for the plaintiff. A rule was subsequently obtained by
Mr. Horry, calling upon the Judge of the Court to show
cause why a prohibition should not issue on the ground
that the claim was barred by the Statute of Limitations.
The matter came on for argument to-day.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL showed cause against the
rule being made absolute, and contended that the Judge,
according to the Act, was perfectly right in ordering the
summons to be corrected.

Mr. HORRY followed in support of the rule.
The COURT considered that the judge had acted
properly, and discharged the rule.
Rule discharged accordingly.

SECONDARIES'.-(THIS DAY.)

(Before Mr. Secondary JANEE.)
WARD V. COX.

This was en action to recover damages for breach of
contract. The plaintiff is an inn-keeper, at Grafton
Regis, and defendant is an ironmonger at Northampton.
The facts of the case were these, in November, 1844,
the plaintiff put his son apprentice, with a premium of
491.—the apprentice remained with his master till Oct.
1847. In consequence of the death of another son, plain-
tiff wrote to detendant for permission for the apprentice
to attend his brother's funeral, but the request was re-
fused, and the lad, acting under the influence of strong
feeling, went home without leave. On his return the
defendant refused to take him back, not, however, on
the ground of disobedience, but because he did not con-
sider the premium was sufficient, and said he would not
take him back unless he was paid 201. more. which was
refused, and after some negotiation the boy was received
back in January this year.
For the plaintiff it was contended that the defendant
by ❑ot pleading admitted that the apprentice had reason-
able ground for absenting himself, and that he (de-
fendant) was not justified in refusing to receive him
back. The question, therefore, was the amount of da-
mages to which plaintiff was entitled. On the other
hand, however, it was shown that after a negotiation
the lad was received back; it was, therefore, contended
that the plaintiff could only recover fur the time the de-
fendant refused to receive him.

The Learned SECONDARY was of that opinion—the
jury had nothing to do with private arrangements inde-
pendent of the contract. They could only find that the
boy was absent fur a certain time, whereby ho had lost
instruction, and plaintiff had been put to expense.
Whatever might have been the inducement for the par-
ties to agree, they had c,rtainly again adopted the in-
denture.
The jury gave a verdict for 6!.

BOW-STREET.-(THIS DAY.)
John Sanders and William Underwood were charged,
the former with stealing, and the latter with receivinK,
watch chain and a fourpenny-piece, the property of Miss
Anderson, the landlady of the Rose and Crown, Clare-
court, Clare-market.

The prosecutrix stated that about fire o'clock last
evening she was lying in bed, being indisposed, when
she heard a footstep in her room. Supposing that it was
some of the people of the house, she took no notice of
the occurrence. She heard a noise as of some one
moving a chain which she had left in a paper box on
her dressing table, but still had no suspicion. A few
militates afterwards, however, she got up, and finding
that the chain was gone, went to the bar to inquire who
had been up stairs.

Other witnesses showed that Sanders had been seen
to go up stairs a few minutes before the prosecutrix
made known her loss. He was given in custody, and
shortly afterwards Underwood gave up the chain, saying
that Sanders had given it to him. On the way to the
station something was heard to fall on the footway, and
a fourpenny piece, which Miss Anderson identified
as haying been attached to the chain, was found near
Sanders's feet.

They were committed for trial on this charge, but as
it was understood there was another charge against
them, they were ordered to be brought up again on
Tuesday.