The Sun.
London, England, 1848-01-26 00:00:00

KIRK V. THE BROMLEY innort.--fUDGMENT.

The LORD CHANCELLOR also gave judgment in this
case, which came before his Lordship some
time since, upon an appeal from the deci•
sion of the Vice-Chancellor, overruling a demurrer
put in by the defendants to the plaintiff's bill. The
bill was filed by the architect of the Union Work-
house at Bromley, to compel the guardians of the
poor of the union to pay him for certain alterations in
the original plan, made at their express suggestion,
and through the interference and desire of their agents.
By the contract between the parties it was expressly
stipulated that no alterations in, or deviations from,
the original plan, were to be paid for unless the in-
structions for that purpose were given to the plaintiff
in writing. The plaintiff by his bill alleged, that the
instructions given for the alterations in question were
tantamount to a written order, and that although he
could not recover for them at law, he had an equitable
claim which the Court would enforce. The Vice-
Chancellor thought there was a fair equitable claim,
and directed the defendants to answer; and from that
judgment the defendants appealed to the Lord Chan-
cellor. His Lordship was clearly of opinion that the
overruling of the demurrer by the Vice-Chancellor
was wrong, and ordered that judgment to be reversed,
and the demurrer allowed.

This judgment has the effect of putting the plain.
tiff's bill out of court.

THR GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY V. TAB
BIRMINGHAM AND OXFORD RAILWAY COMPANY.
The further arguments in this part-heard appeal
motion were then resumed, and occupied the Court
the remainder of the day.

SECONDARIES'.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Secondary POTTER.)

LOSSES ON RAILWAY SEEARES.---OLDHAM V. RIDGE.

The plaintiff in this action is a sharebroker at
Manchester, and the defendant is also a sharebroker
in the City. The claim was for 461. 17s. Gd., the
difference on sale of fifty shares in the North Staf-
fordshire Railway Company, the ahares having been
purchased by plaintiff at the request of the defendant,
but which defendant afterwards refused to accept, and
11. 16s. 6d. for commission on the original purchase.
The defendant having suffered judgment to go by
default, it was only necessary to prove the value and
resale of the shares.

Mr. Jos. E. Oldham, the son to the plaintiff, was
called, and proved that a letter was received from
the defendant, dated the 4th of September, 1846, re-
questing the purchase of the shares mentioned, and
they were accordingly bought, at a premium, for
4961. 17s. 6d. Defendant not taking them up, they
were resold at a loss of 461. 17:s. 6d.

The Learned SECONDARY directed the jury that the
plaintiff was entitled to the full amount of his claim;
and a verdict for 481. lis. was accordingly entered.

MARLBRO'-STREET—( THIS DAY)
George James, a private in the Royal Artillery,
was placed before Mr. Hardwick, eharged with steal-
ing a silver watch, and a picture, the property of his
uncle, James Boxam, King's Mews, South-street,
Grosvenor-square.
It appeared that the prisoner was on a furlough in
the month of December last, and was staying at the
prosecutor's. On the 22d of that month, while the
prosecutor was in bed, the prisoner took the oppor-
tunity of stealing a silver watch, and a picture, with
which he decamped. Information was forwarded to
the police with a description of the prisoner, and last
night he was taken into custody.
Police-sergeant John Gray, 10 C, said he took the
prisoner into custody yesterday evening at the Royal
Artillery Barracks, Woolwich. He told him of the
nature of the charge against him, when he (prisoner)
admitted stealing the articles, and said he had pledged
the watch fur eighteen shillings, and sold the ticket
for three shillings. The picture be bad sold to A
publican for three shillings.
The prisoner, who admitted the charge, was re'
gianded.