The Sun.
London, England, 1846-03-27 00:00:00

4s
LON DON, FRIDAY vres
. -•
; . •

`[HE CAMPAIGN on the SUTLEJ creatinga
Immense interest at the present. moment, there is exhibiting
at the ROYAL POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTION • Portraits of the
most Distinguished Men both in the SIKH ARMY and GOVERN-
MENT of LAHORE, takyn by a lady of • rank, distinguished in the
Fine Arts, duringlier'residence in India. Also, Portraits of Sir Henry
llardinge, Sir. Robert and Laity Sale, &c. By means of the OPAQUE
MICROSCOPE .these interesting Portraits are on a magnifto. nt
scale. Mornings, at Half-past Four o'ciock ; Evenings at a Quarter
to Ten. The LECTURES include those on ASTRONOMY, during
Lent on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, COLEMAN'S WORK-
.ICG MODEL ascending and descending Inclined Planes, &e. &e.
Admimion, Is. Schools, dalf-priee.

A RT-UNION OF. LONDON.
4, Trafalgar-square, Charing-cross.
By Authority of Parliament.
President—His Royal Highness the Duke of CAMBRIDGE.
The list for the current year will close en the 31st instant.
Subscribers will receive for each guinea paid, besides the el-intim
of obtaining a valuable work of art, an impression of a line-
engraving by Mr. P. Lightfoot, from the picture by Mr. H. O'Neil,
" Jerhtha's Daughter," and, in addition to this, a series of designs
in outline, made expressly for the Society by Mr. G. B. Hicks, illus-
trat;ve of Campbell's " Gertrude of Wyoming."
GEORGE GODWIN,/ Hon.
LEVIS POCOCK, Secretaries.

,
x.- A T A L LOA:.N.- FUND Lire;
• .. 'ANCE cOCIETi Y,
Capltai.,s9o,ooo.
Empowered 1-5, Act at Parsdarnett-
This Institution inters oup.:Jrtam and eahstantiat
(ages with respect both is Life Assnrenees mid Deferred AnnMtiei.
The ass7ired has, on all ocessiens. the power to borrnr, without WA-
pense .kr tertoiturc of the ecitcy, two-thirds Oi the premium paid.
(see tab.c); also the option of seieotinf benefits, and the conversiot,
of lii interests to meet ether corrveni.olc.s .4r reeessity, Assurances
for terms of years are irrenteo on the lowest posSible rates.
DWISION OF PkOFIT
The s4ccess anti thcreasirtg "res-I,,rity ot soclei, has enana.
he Oirecters, a the last annual invostigatou, to declare a third
ilonus, ro.ryir.g frotm 3u to 75 per cent. on the premiums paid en
each Polley effected on -.11, Profit seals

I c 4. ry

7: •
Premium.
.u.
ec,„

t

I£l37£l:li 13 51
s. (1. 1,38 16,,;, 13 0,
00a-7-4 4 ts:is 13. B'l3 -61
18 49 119 0 0

of pronti :, annual, and the nemt male 111
' nr of 4 ne Drc,..ent, year.

!,"*. PER(IIT4O CI 2 ',V, iStriTX.

"LAW FIRE INSURANCE SOCIETY
(Completely Registered under the Act 7th and Bth Vict
cau. 110

Offices, Nos. 5 and (5, Chi ucery-lane.
Subscribed Capital, Five Millions titerling.

TRUSTEES,

The 11:ght Hon. the Earl of Demon •
The Right Hon. Lord Cottenham
The Right lion. the Vice Chancellor of England
The Right Hon. the Lord Chief Baron
The Right Hon. Sir Herbert Jenner Fust (Dean of the Irelies, &G.)
William Wingfield, Ewe (Master in Chancery)
Richard Richards, Ewa.. M.P. (Master in Chancery.)
DIRY,CTORS.
(The * denotes a Director of the Law Life, and the *t a Director of
the Legal sod General Life Insurance Society.)
Bethell, Richard, Esq., Q.C.
t Bigg, Edward Stnlh, Esq., Southampton •bulldings
Boodle, John, Esq., Davies-street. Berkeley s mare •
• Brown, ,Anthony, Esq. (Chamberlain of Loudon)
Budd, Thomas William, Esq., Bedford-row
Chicheiter. J. H. 11., Esq., Lincoln's Inn.
* Chisholme, William, Esq., Lincoln's Inn-fields
* Clarke, Thomas. Esq. (Solicitor to the Ordnance)
Cox, John, Esq., Lincoln's Inn-fields
Jortin. Lee, Esq., Lincoln's lan-fields
Kinde ley, George Herbert, Esq., Lincoln's Inn •
Lee, John Benjamio, Esq., Dean's-yard, Westminster
t Lyon, James Wittit, Esq., Spring-gardens
t Rose, the Hon. Sir George (one of the Judges of the Court of
Bankrupts y and Master in Chancery)
t Simpkieson, Sir Francis, Q C.
* Smeoley, Francis, Esq„ (High Bailiff of Westminster)
t Tatham Meaburn, Esq. Lincoln's Inn-fields
Tilso , Thomas, Esq , Coleman-street
Twist, Horses, Esq., Q.C. (Vice-Chancellor of Lancaster) •
Tyssen, John R. D., Esq„ Ilanor Offices, Hackney
* Vizard, William, Esq., Lincoln's Inn-fields
White, Edward, Esq. (Auditor of the Duchy of Cornwall)
Wilde, Edward Archer, Esq., College-hill
t Wing. Thomas, Esq., Gray's Inn-square.
AUDITORS.
Bailey, Charles, Esq., Stratford-place
Bockett, Daniel Smith, Esq., Lincoln's Inn-fields
Broderlp, Francis, Esq., Lincoln's Inn
Scadding, Edwin Ward, Esq., Gordon-street.
SECRETARY—Edward Blake Beal, Esq.
ARCHITECTS AND SURVEYORS.
Thomas Bell any, Esq., Charlotte-street, Bedford-square
George Powtiall, Esq., Bedford-row.
SOLlCrroas—Messrs. Edward and Charles Harrison, 19, Bedford-row

BANKERS—Messrs. Coutts and Company.
The terms are in general the same a 4 those of the other principal
insurance offices. The advantages to the insured consist in the
magnitude of the capital responsible for lo.ses, and in. the known
ohAracter of the Trustees, Dirtctors, and Proprietary.

GENERAL TOM THUMB'
WILL SHORTLY- CLOSE HIS FAREWELL LEVEES AT
TliE EGYPTIAN-HALL. Many persons having procured tickets
without being able to gain admission, those tickets will continue to
be received, but the public is respectfully informed that his Morning
Levees are much less crowded than those of the Evening.
The little General appears every day and evening in all the eos-
tumeg and performances which he had the distinguished honour of
appearing in three times before her Majesty, and before all the prin-
cipal Courts of -Europe:
flours from Half-past Twelve to Two, Half-past Three to Five,
and Malf-past Seven to Nine-o'cloek.
Admission lg.—Children under Ten years, half price.
After Niue o'clock on each Evening he appears in his new play
at the Lyceum Theatre.

DUKE'S HEAD FAMILY AND COMMERCIAL HOTEL AND

POSTING-HOUSE,
TUESDAY MARKET-PLACE, KING'S LYNN.
CULYER (late of the Bowling
Green Hotel, Norwich). respectfully informs the nobility,
gentry, and the inhabitants of Lynn and its Vicinity, that he has,en-
tered upon the occupancy of the above-named Inn. Commercial Gentle-
men will find that the utmost care is taken to insure their comfort
and convenience, and to them and the Agricultural Gentlemen at-
tending Lynn market,
.W C. pledges himself to use his best endea•
yours to render the house worthy of their patronage. The domestic
arrangements are under the personal superintendence of Mrs. Culyer,
and will be found'to be of the best class. The Wines and Spirits will
be selected with the greatest care.
. N.B. Excellent Stabling and Coach-houses.
Post Hories, Flies, and Carriages as- usual.

N'COLL'S PALETOT of LLAMA • CLOTH
registered 6 and 7 Vic., cap. 65. .atronised by the Prince
Consort, Prince George of Cambridge, Sae.
ThiS oyerco,l recommends itself to the Public . generally by its
peculiar elasticity and lightness, moderate price, and able defence
against the almost eonstant humidity of the climate of Great Britain.
To be had in Louden only of the Patentees, 114, Regent-street.

DEAFNESS.—Dr. SCOTT'S curious HEAR-
ING INSTRUMENT, which has been so favourably reviewed
by the Periodical Press, is now submitted to general inspection (with
the valious reports made thereon) at Mr. Llewelyn's Medical Re-
pository; 369; Strand, the third 'house- from Exeter Ball ; where its
extraordinary properties may be tested by the public at large, and it*
singular power of renAering conversation comfortably and distinctly
audible, even to the dfafest ear, proved to the satisfaction of any
per-
son afflicted with defective hearing.
AI! ERI CAN

NEWS.

THE UNITED STATES.
FIVE DAYS LAT R.
LIVERPOOL, THURSDAY AFTERNOON.
The -Montezuma, Captain Lowler, and the Marmion, Captain
Edwards, have just arrived here with New York papers to
the sth. The news is unimportant. The Oregon question
was still under discussion. The commercial news is not
portant.

07cIEVilnd COMMERCIAL NEWS,
(From' The Sun of Last Night.)
The Cotton market at Liverpool, yesterday, was very in-
animate, and, the business was decidedly in flavour of the
buyers, although'not at a further decline than %d. per lb. on
the rates of Friday last, The sales were 4,000 bales, includ-
ing SCO Ainerican, for export; 200 P,rnam and Maranham,
:it 53/4d. to 7d.; 50 Egyptian, at o.id to 8',4d.; and 50 Sea
Islind, at 121 to 15d. per lb. Shares were again dull and

uniug.
it is • much to be regretted that our Contemporary, the
Times, should continue the line of policy which it thought
proper in the first instance to adopt of exciting alarm among
the moneyed interests on account of calls upon railways,
the plans for which are now under the ordeal of Parlia-
mentary strutiny. It ought not to be forgotten that the
point taken up in the ".rcpt instance by the leading
journal was,. that as much as from twenty-five to
thirty millionS sterling would be locked up as deposits
upon new railways projected in the course of last year. The
fact turns out to be that from ten to twelve millions have
thus been absorbed as yet, which was quietly drawn out of
circulation, and lodged with the Accountant General,
without any apparent pressure. This fact is admitted.
But now, says our Contemporary, considering what
mny happen hereafter, the calls upon shares that
will pass Parliament " threaten a more formi-
dable evil, since they will not he confined to a few
weeks, but will spread over years, as a continued drain on
the monetary resources of the country." The fallacy of this
hypotheSis has over and over again 'been demonstrated. It
is notorious with those who usefully comment upon correct
information, that the expenditure upon railways hitherto
in this country has tended to improve the con- I
dition of the labourer, and all other grades above
him in connexion with railway extension. The millions of
money that have already been expended in the formation of
railways were brought into operation, and without produc-
ing the slightest panic in the money market. Nineteen•
twentieths of the existing lines are profitable invests
ments, and how • a continuation of so good a system
can damage the circulation, or impose difficulties
in the way of conducting ether branches of industry or of
commerce, is a point which we leave the journal referred to
to prove to the satisfaction of well-informed men, who hold
a directly contrary opinion. No fact can be more clearly
demonstrated than that when new railways have been
commenced the circulation of money is immediately
extended, and doing betietfist only to the county
through which each passes, bait also adding to the comforts
of the lower classes. It may be true that the prices of the
shares of existing lines have been unduly elevated, but this
was the natural result of strict confidence in the endertaking,
and not a little to be ascribed to the circumstance that a
higher rate of interest was obtained for money advanced in
their construction than that yielded by the Public Securities.
Further accounts have come to hand this morning from the
seat of war on the Sutlej, but only in the main confirmatory
of those before obtained. There is every reason to hope that
the missing steamer the Virago is safe.
The Consul Market has been almost neglected this morn-
ing. For the Account the.current price is 96, and for money
from 953% to 96. Exchequer-bills have been taken at from
28s. to 255. premium this morning. Bank Stock for the
account has fallen from 21114 to 210.
The Foreign Funds have not been dealt 'in much to-day.
The chief changes are a fall in Russian Five per Cents. from
109 to 108. Spanish Five per Cents. for the Account have
been offered at 25112 for the Account, and the Three per Cents.
at 363%. The Dutch Two-and-a-Half per Cents. are at
591 , and the Four per Cents. at 9414. The Grenada One
per Cent. Bonds have just been taken at 22.
The prices of Railway Shares have varied but in a trifling
degree from those of yesterday.
13E111811 FUNDS

ONE
O'CLOCK.
95% 96

CLOSING
PRICES.

Three per Cent. Consols Annuities ..
Long Annuities, Expire Jan. 5, IS6O
lato, 30 years, Jan. 5, 1860 .. .
Bank Stock for Account .. • •
Consols for Account • • • • • •
Exchequer Bills.
1,0001...
500/. .•
Ditto, Small

.. .. 210

IN d.
24 28 25 pm.
29 pia.
27 29 pm.
ONE
O'CLOCK.
.. .. 22

FOREIGN FUNDS.
Grenada, 1 per Cent

• • • .. 109 108

EUXSiall Bonds . • •
Spanish Bonds, 5 per Cent
Ditto, for the Account
Ditto, nISSiVe Bonds
Ditti4, Three per Cent
Ditto, for the Account .. • • .. 36%
Venezuela Bonds, 2 per Cent .. .. 44
Dividends on the above payalele in London.
Dutch Two-and-a-Half per Cent 59%%
Ditto, 4 per Cent. Certificates .. 94U

.. .. 25%
.. .. 5%

PRICES OF
RAILWAY SHARES.

10%
210

CLOSING
PRICES.

BC SINE SS CLOSING
PAID. DONE AT PRICES.
ONE O'CLOCK.

Amber., Notting., Boston, and
Eastern Junction .. • • • • 2% •• • • 1% .
Boston, Stamford, & Birmingham. 225. .... y di5.....
Birmingham and Gloucester. .. 100
Bristol and Exeter .. 75
Ditto New .. . • • • . . • 5 .. 9 9
Buckinghamshire .. • • • • 425. 1 % X dis... die
Caledonian .. 10 _ 714
Ditto, Half Shares .... 1%
Ditto, Extension .. 214 .... 1%
Chester and Holyhead .. 20 .... 16% 17%
Direct Manchester (Rastrick's) .. 514
Direct Northern .. • • .. .. 2y, 134%
Dublin and Belfast Junction .. 10 .... ..
Dublin and Galway .. .. .. —1%
Eastern Counties .. 141. . , 201 y 19X • . 19X
Ditto New .........Si. 165..... 474 5 p.... 51,4 p
Ditto, York Extension .. 10s. .... 74 1 ...... .• 1
East Lincolnshire .. 114
East and West of England .. 1% %.
Edinburgh and Glasgow .. .. 50 .... 72 .. •• • ..... C 72
Ditto Is; Shares .. .. 5 ... •12 .. •• • • .... 12
Ditto, Quarter Shares .. 12% . 171 18 .. 18
Goole, Doneast., and .hellield,&c. 425..... % 1 dis dis.
Grand Union (Nottingh. & Lynn) 1% .• • • %. • 34
Great Southern & West. (Ireland) 15 .. ..6% 151 . . 1614
Great North of England too ...2115
Great Western .. 85 ..140
Ditto, Quarter Shares 5 14N 14 ••• • .. 14
Hull and Selby • • 40 ....100 .. • ..... 99
Ditto 14 Shares .. _ 121¢ —•••••' ' ' • • . • 20
Ditto, Halt Shares 7 --....... ... 23
Lancaster and Carlisle .. 35 ••••• • • • • •
Ditto, New .. 5 _ 8 •• • . ..... 8
Leicester and Bedford .... 225. ••• • ••••• • • • • • %'dis
Liverpool and Leeds Direct .. 2% .. • • 21& 1%
London an Birmingham . .100 .... 217 216.. ..
Ditto Thirds .. 16 49% ••••• • • • • • 49%
Ditto Quarters .. 2 •25% 26%
Ditto Fifths 2 22% 2334
London and Blackwall• 16/. 13s. 4d. 734 7%
Ditto New .. 3% • • • • • • • • • • 3%
London and Brighton ~50• 611,4% 601 • • 61
Ditto, Consol. Eighths .. .. 40 ••• • " ... •• ' ' —3
Ditto ditto Fifths .. 2O .... 27 26%
London and Croydon .. .. 131. 15s 9d. 191 %••• • • •
London and Greenwich .. 12/. 159. 4d.
London and South• Western.. 41/. 6s. 10d. 73 74 ••. • • • 7
London dud York .. 2%.... 134 34 •••• • • • •
London, Warwick, & Kiddertains. 23 •• • • 14
Manchester and Leeds .. 82 •• • • ••' • " " •
Ditto, Fifths .. _ 2 ••••• • • • • •
Manchester and 'Birmingham .. 40 •• 75 "' • .... •
Ditto, Quarter Shares (A) .. 4 .... 101 11
Ditto, Quarter Shares (B) .. 2 .• • • 93% 54 •••• • • • •
Manchester, Buxton, & Matlock 425. •• • • 14% P Par • •
Manchester and Southampton. .. 2 •• • • ••••• • • • • •
Midla-81 ..100 ....141 14n.... • •
Ditto, New ... 18 26% % 27% 26% 27
Ditto, Birmingham and Derby 108 .• • • 113 112. • •
Newcastle and Berwick .. 10 .... 15% 16
North British .. 20 .... 24 23 ...... • •
Ditto, Halt Shares .. 6 .... 8% 7........
Ditto, Carlisle Extension .. 11% .• • • 1X14••• • • • • •
North Kent and Direct Dover • • 2% .• • • 1% ...•
North Staffordshire 42a. •• .. 214 IX p....
Norwich and Brandon .. .. 18 .... 22 • •
Oxfd.,Worcester, & Wolverlunptn. 12% .... 9X ••••• • • • • •
Perth and Inverness • • .. 2%.... 1 • .......•
Portsmouth I 'irect .. .. 214 ... • •
Rugl;y and Huntingdon .. 2 .... 1% .....•
Scottish Central .. . .. 10 •• .. 13 .. • ••• • • •
Shrewsbury- and Birmingham .. • • 134 •••• • • • •
South Midland .. 42s .•• • % % dis .. • •
South Staffordshire Junction .. •• • • 2_ ••••• • • • • •
South Eastern and Dovor 33% . • . • 34 l 4 34 • • • • • •
NNeeww rdoo 3135/1..6)5. 8.
.d .)
No. No.
42.. 102
2% % 1 x . •
Trent Valley and Holyhead June. 2%. •• • 2,
••••• • • • • •
Vale of Neath .. 2 •• • • .••
•
Warwickshire and London 425. •• • • '-us• '• •• • •
Welsh Midland 114 1........
West Riding Union ..• 425. .• .. P. ••• • • • 1 •34 P
Yarmouth and Norwich .. .. 20 .... 24% 24%
York and North Midland _ to 94 .. •• • • 94
Ditto, Selby 30 71% . • • • • • • . 711
Ditto. Extension .. 15 .. • 30
Do. E. and W. Riding Exten,„ 1 •• • •
FOREIGN' RAILWAYS.
Boulogne and Amiens .. 12 121%
Bord., Teul., & Cette tMackenxie) 2 .• • • 1% 2. •• •
Ditto, ditto (Espelete) • • 2•• • • 2 ** •" • '
Dutch Rhenish .. • • 5 •• • • •"„ ••••• • • • •
East Indian . be. •• • • 'Atli •••
••• • • •
Grt. Noith. of France Constituted b •• •• 15 ••••• • • - • •
Luxembourg 4 .... 1% ......
Naraut and Liege .. 4•• • • 21,4 2 .. • •
Orleans and Bordeaux .. .. 6 .... 12% %
Over Yssel . • .. 3s. 4d.... 3 dis,. •.• ..
Sambre and Meuse . 6 .... 3% • • .....
Tours and N fltes Constituted .. 5 .... 63,4 .. •• •
JOINT,t,TOCK BANKS.
London and Westminster 20 .... 26%
MINES.

1%
% dis.
125

6%N••••

British Iron . • • • .. .. 10 19%
Real del Monte, unregistered .. 34%

LA.NV ISTELLIGENCE.

IN
par
1%
140

,74',dis

1 dii,

121,6
8 die

HOUSE OF LORDS, March 26.
Their Lordship's sat at ten o'clock this morning to bear
Scotch appeals. The Peers present were Lord Brougham,
Lord Cottenham, and Lord Campbell.
THE EARL OF HOPETOWN V. RAMSAY.
The arguments in this appeal from the judgment of the
Court of Session were commenced, and occupied their Lord-
ships the whole morning.

COURT OF CHANCERY, March 26.
The Lord Chancellor sat in the Old Hall, Lincoln's-inn to-
day, and heard lunatic and cause petitions.
ARCTI ER V. HUDSON—INJUNCTION.
His LORDSHIP gave judgment to-day in this case, which
argued before him about a week since, upon an appeal
wag
the decision of the Master of the Rolls. Upon the
l yt
hen
stated
them.
HisthA
e ficrdp,
ts,sahni and
afteritisg
a there-
fore, a
Into the case, dismissed the appeal
N
THE MATTER OF DICE SOMBRE, LUNATIC.
Upon this case, which stands on the paper for hearing,
‘t,itcho hearing
neusonisdntese of
r. the
unnecessary
a g
IN caebcry length
to ats;heef
up the petition of y: r. Dyce Sombre, to supersede the com-
mission of lunacy.
Mr. NV aIEEFIELD, who appeared for the petitioner, stated
that he felt that he could not properly occupy the time of the
Court by opening the petition, as Mr. Dyes Sombre had not
come within the jurisdiation of the Court, he would rather
that the petition should be discussed, than proceed with it
under such circumsrances.
Mr. CALVERT trusted that the Court would dismiss the
petition.
The LORD CHANCELLOR declined to do so, considering the
circumstances of the case; and after a short conversation,
Mr WAKEFIF.ED obtained leave to amend the petition.
The . LORD CHANCELLOR said an application had been
made to him to hear a petition connected with the case in
his private room. Looking at the circumstances of the case
he had determined to hear nothing with respect to the
lunacy in private. Ultimately it was arranged that the
petition of the Committee of the estate to which his Lordship
referred, and which related to certain jewels, should be heard
the first to. morrow.
IN THE MATTER OF THE rarnEss BARIATINSKI.
This case came before the Court upon petition praying that
certain jewellery belonging to the Princess, which was now
deposited in the Bank of England in the name of the Ac-
countant-General of the Court of Chancery, might be re-

moved to the office of Mr. Commissioner Barlow, for the
convenience of inspection, in order to have a value put upon
them by' competent judges previous to their sale, if such sale
should be approved of by the officer of the. Court.
Ilis-LonDsmr; after a short discussion, made the order.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, March 26.
(Before dm VICE CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.)
Hislioxoun Wok motions and cause petitious to-day, none
of which possessed any feature of interest.

• ADMIRALTY COUR7', March 25.
THE SARACEN.
LUSHLNGTON gave
.judgment in this case. It was a
claim by the assignees of the bulk of the cargo of the ship
Diligeat, to share rateably in the proceeds of the sale of the
Severn, which vessel having caused damage to the other,
her owners had been held liable.

The Court, assisted by the Trinity Masters, had,' in a suit
by the owners of the Diligent and of part of her cargo, pro-
nounced against the ship, and had condemned her owners in
the:costs. On the very day of that decision and decree, an
appearance had been given for the owners of the remaining
bulk of the cargo, who claimed to share in the proceeds of
the sale of the ship—proceeds insufficient to meet the de-
mands of the first claimants; and the question now was,
whether, according to the law and practice of the Court,
a party who had obtained a decree was bound to liquidate
the demands of another party, whose claim was of the

. .
same nature as his own, not being a party to that decree,
and commencing proceedings after that decree bad
been issued. With reference to the analogy of other Courts,
this claim was not dissimilar to the claims of creditors
against an executor, 'and the rule of law in that case, as laid
down by 31r.Williams, in his book on Executors, second-edi-
tion, was that the most active were entitled to the first consi-
deration of the Court, and those who first applied and first
obtained judgment, were entitled to the liquidation of their
claim before the liquidation of subsequent claimants. -If that
ease were analogous to the present, the owners of the bulk of
the cargo must fail in their prayer ; but was there any dis-
tinction between the two cases ? It had been said that in the
previous decree of the Court, and on the security given by
the previous claimants, a right was reserved to subsequent
parties having a similar claim to come in and receive their
share. The words used might extend to liens entitled to
priority, but certainly not that parties who had originally
made their claim and recovered their money should bring it
back; and whether the parties had actually received their
money or not, could not make any difference. There was nc
ground for this claim within the four corners of that instru-
ment. The Court might perhaps call back the money, but it
could not redistribute it. Equity could not compel this
Court to do that which in an analogous case a court of
equity would not do itself, and a court of equity would not
grant a similar claim in the case of creditors, to which allu-
sion had already been made. Besides, this Court was rather
a court of law than of equity. But what had been the prac-
tice of the Court There seemed to have been a sort of
understanding that such a claim would be admitted by
the court; but absolute proof of the practice was neces-
sary, a mere vague general understanding could not,
be relied on, and of the practice itself there was no
proof at all. But reference had been made to the 53d George
111., c. 159. By the 7th section, power was given to ship-
owners to file a bill in a court of equity, to compel parties
having similar claims to come in, and share a rateable distri-
bution ; but this power was given for the benefit of ship-
owners, not for the benefit of co-claimants. Probably the
Court might have exercised the equitable jurisdiction given
by the 15th section previous to the decree; but as the power
given by the Act was for the benefit and protection of the
shipowners, the Court could not use it against them. The 6th
section, too, saved the right to bring all actions in courts of
competent jurisdiction, unless a bill of equity had been
tiled, and here no bill had been filed; and so the parties
who had arrested the ship stood in exactly the same
position as before the statute. Why should he who was dili-
gent be compelled to surrender the fruits of his diligence to
hint who was less active? The decree of the Court gave a
new title, superior to that of the claimants previously to its
issue. But it was said the present was a foreign vessel ;
this, however, made no shade of distinction. There was nei-
ther principle, nor analogy, nor practice, which compelled the
Court to allow a party, who only appeared on the very day of
a decree to a previous claimant, to share a rateable distribu-
tion. But there bad been another ground asserted on behalf
of the claim—an agreement between the parties. The Court,
however, doubt-d its jurisdiction to regard or notice any
agreement between proctors not appearing in acts of Court.
Such private agreements were questions for a court of equity
—not capable of being adequately decided elsewhere. So the
Court hesitated to enter at all into any such question ; but in
the act of petition there was in this case a distinct denial of
any agreement—a denial supported by, and contradicted by,
no affidavit. To the statements on either side the Court im-
puted no intentional error • but it was no part of its duty to
decide upon this agreement. If it were proved, it had no
authority to act upon it ; and it certainly offered no induce-
ment to the Court to alter its former decree, and to alter it
in favour of parties who had awaited the previous decision,
and bad taken no chance of incurring costs in the original
question. The Court, therefore, resisted the prayer to share
in distritution, but, under the circumstances, not with costs.
TEE CONSTANTIA. .

Dr. LUSIIINGTON also pronounced his judgment in this
case. He said that subsequently to the preparation of his
decision he had received .a petition from the consignees of
certain silver, which for the benefit of the vessel had been
sold at Bahia. It had struck him that that was merely a
question of average, but as a distinct prayer had been made
with regard to it, he would reserve that point, but proceed to
pronounce his decision on the question which remained for
consideration in this case, viz. ; whether the freight alone
was liable for the wages, pilotage, towage, and similar ex-
penses incurred by this ship. The parties interested in the
presentnuestionletere the consignees of the cargo, ancrthe
holders of a bond, dated April, 1845. That question was
whether the freight and the ship, or freight alone, was liable
for the expenses above-mentioned. This Peruvian vessel,
on a voyage from Lima to London, laden with guano and
silver, had met with had weather, and had put into Bahia.
The master had sold the silver for the good of
the vessel, and subject to any future considera-
tion. The question relating to that silver seemed
to be a question of average, not to be dealt with
in that Court. The rroduce of the silver, however, was not
sufficient to meet the requirements of the ship, and the
master granted two bottomry bonds, both dated Feb. 27 ;
one upon the ship, and the other upon the cargo alone. The
vessel had then put to sea, and had met with a collision.
The master had then given another bond upon the ship
alone, and that bond was the one whose holders were now
before the Court. This state of things was very peculiar.
The Court scarcely remembered any similar case of a bond
upon the cargo alone. The general principle of bottom
was that, as the benefit was given to the ship, the owners
of the ship, in the first instance, and then of the freight,
should be liable for money lent upon bottomry. In the
Gratitudiue, decided by Lord Stowell, the ship, freight, and
cargo, were all made liable on the face of the bond, but it
was admitted that the ship and freight were first liable. In
the Prince Regent, also, Lord Stowell had more distinctly
decided that the ship and freight must first be ex—
hausted before the cargo could be made available. The
freight was to be called in, though not mentioned in
the bond, and be applied in satisfaction of the bond,
and this whether the bondholder required it or not. It
was a right belonging to the owners of the cargo ; and the
principles thus laid down did not apply merely to a bond
upon a ship. If the bond were upon the freight, the ship
would, under the same principle, be liable before the cargo
could be applied, to the liquidation of the bond. But the
circumstances in this case were particular. Here there was
a bond upon the cargo, the validity of which was admitted.
The Court had therefore been compelled to pronounce in
favour of it, but that decision was of course subject to the
three
hip,
general principles of law as to the prior liability of the
owners
7,eorene uponhere
h bonds
es
and the other upon the cargo—the third (dated Aprtil), upon
—the o
two f the ship olniippen and
one fredigahtet. (FTehh.e2re7
the ship alone. How were these bonds to be paid ? The
last bond was to be paid first, and as that bond was
upon the ship alone, the ship, in the first instance, was
liable. If'any surplus were left, that surplus must go to the
satisfaction of two prior bonds. They were of the same
date, and not entitled to priority. They must be taken
together. These two bonds were upon the ship and cargo—
the freight not having been hypothecated at all. To the
satisfaction of these two bonds, first must be applied the sur-
plus of the proceeds of the ship—what then ? Accord'ng to
the proper construction, the bond upon the cargo must be
read as if it were a bond upon the ship, freight, and cargo.
If this were so, the proceeds of the freight must next be ap-
plied, and lastly, the cargo. But now came the immediate
question—from what funds were the wages, the towage, and
the pilotage to be paid ? It.was said out of the frieght. The
Court could not understaud why. The ship received equal
benefit from such service, as did the owners of the freight ;
and there was no reason why the holders of the bonds upon
the ship alone should meet with any great favour. They bad
taken the liability of the ship alone, when they might have
demanded the liability of the ship and freight. These ex-
penses, therefore, must be paid out of the ship and freight
egaal!y, and the motion that the freight alone should be
liable for them rejected.
264

ASSIZE IN TELLIGENCE.
MIDLAND ClRCUlT.—Coventry, March 24.
(Before Lord Chief Justice TINDAL.)
THE QUEEN V. JOHN THOMPSON AND WILLOUGHBY WILSON.
The prisoners were indicted for a highway robbery, ac-
companied with violence, at the parish of Foleshill, about
three miles from this city.
Mr. Hayes appeared .as counsel for the prosecution ; Mr.
Miller defended the prisoner Thompson, and Mr. Flood de-
fended Wilson.
From the statement of the Learned Counsel for the prose-
cution, which was borne out by the evidence, it appeared that
the prosecutor, whose name was Faulkner, was returning
to Foleshill from Coventry, having a considerable sum of
money in his possession, on the night of the 11th of this
month. He was overtaken in his way by the two prisoners,
of whom he inquired the way to Mr. Walker's, the
boat-builder, at Foleshill, and told them that he wanted to
pay him some money. After treating the two prisoners to
some beer at a public-house, they all proceeded on their way,
but upon their arrival at a second public-house Wilson pro-
ceeded apparently on his way home, the other prisoner and
the prosecutor remaining behind for about five minutes. After
this they again proceeded on their journey. The prosecutor
suggested that they should go across a footpath, which they
did, and at the end of about 500 yards they found Wilson
lying down on the ground near the stile. They spoke to him,
and passed on for about 400 yards further, when, upon ar-
riving at another stile, the prisoaer Thomson threw the pro-
secutor -suddenly into a ditch more than half full of water. At

that moment a s.'cond person, whom the prosecutor could
net identify, came up and jumped upon him as he was lying
in the ditch ; and they both attempted to drown him in the
ditch, the one trampling on him, while the other held his
head under water. The second person pulled out a kni:
similar to one afterwards found in Wilson's pocket, and de-
clared he would cut the prosecutor's throat; and was only
prevented from doing so by the prisoner Thompson, who
said "he would drown fast enough." They then robbed him
of all his money, and left hint in a very exhausted state.
Both the prisoners were apprehended on the following day,
but none of the stolen property had ever been found.
Thompson's hat and clothes were found covered with mud
and dirt; the shoes of Wilson were found to correspond with
footmarks at the place where the robbery was committed,
but that field was in the occupation of the prisoner's brother.
Mr. MILLeR contended that the whole transaction was a
drunken frolic, in which he admitted that his client had par-
ticipated.
Mr Floor), in addressing the jury, denied that there was
sufficient evidence of the presence of Wilson on the occasion,
the.prosecutor having been unable to identify him, though
acquainted with his features.