The Sun.
London, England, 1846-11-25 00:00:00

TILF SITNi I, O.N

_-_

Co

'RET NEWS.-(TIIIS DAY.)

,s_AIC: f 1 2i• CHANGE—WEDNESDAY
...we tbe -g4 the arrivals of English Wheat since Monday
hete, ttet!l Inoderately good, the show of samples of that article
Waa very ~111°rnhig, was small. The demand, therefore,
Qn listths'entdY, at fully the improved currencies obtained
atikttd. ID yeti',
and at which a good clearance was
-ert hell,--e quantity of froe foreign Wheat was pods, 111 00, the sale for it was firm at extreme quotation . high "4 under lock neat to nothing 'was doing, owing to the
tatiepretensions of th • pot rs Malting and grinding
,13.1 WIS quite as deearnn, wirthea *steady inquiry. In *alt,
'earls, ii)l°dere.te business was doing at late rates. Oats,
Pte'
and Flour supported previous hgures.
ARRIVALS.
I Barley. I Oats I Flour.
380 qrs. 30 qrs. 1,230 ski.
700 150 I --
1 4,110 870 1
Malt. qrs.
PWe haa VinIITECEMPEZ.
tetu.s'ilerajfahttu_ll averagesupply,eoac Meaty, on sale to-day.
Vial‘ terrVag, the trade was heavy, on somewhat easier
.., irom 2s 6(1 to 33 6d ; Mutton 3s 44 to 4s 6_d ;
' ;,- wile 03 4s 6d; and Pork, 3s 4d to 4s 8d per lb, by the

„
roru. ... • •
.. .. ”
.

Wheat.
1,410 qrs.

"itTING INTELLIGENCE
BETA cRECEIVED THIS DAY.)
, 1:1448 'llll'4G AT MANCHESTER.—FRIDAY.
8 t 1 1'.•15 to 2 st Van Tromp, 15 to 1 apt Epir te,
°
ttsk°"l a,,gst Planetag, 25 to 1 agst Sister to Cobweb colt
%(t4kenn 4,8 to 1 agst Glentilt (taken), 33 to I agst Oldl'ort
It Tk"5,,,t0 1 agst Johnny Armstrong (taken), 3a, to I
freredc, hiss Iris colt (taken), 5 to 1 agst Scotts lot
lik,
41(144E11 Cur (ENTER on Nor).-50 to 1 offered on the
_
11,

ilatiu r PEDESTRIANISM.
114 1-7„Of Bradford) AND J. Slum (of London).—
Num' `7Yurds e off yesterday, at Bellevue-
n'ortl 72.44sinehester! e.;rate need not say that the Brad-
al tli—; had a high reputation for fleetness of foot,
byor
wh Lsatue attribute --is freely conceded to Smith,
.4t„'ee, t °F""l' hint in pedestrian circles as " the Regent-I the " lienee considerable interest was excited,dis_
'''aYed Maud, despite the wetness of the day,
relt kill Mend,
assemblage. The men started
ta.
I,teNtits-114te3 after one o'clock, after six or seven and
'4, lteD 1-)alith certainly tigo the lead at going 9ff
' a of
41,1111eEi1,„itWell 'until about 0 yards, when Brian s t
Rieana --44,3' near. It w however only a transien
41'''tigl(),,` hope for his -frieaands, for Smith. ran fleetly and
—°iYarP 41R1 eventually came in the winner by a couple
-..—5tt„,_......1.

_ ..
________...........-.....
Blur,
--NO.------v. 2:2------The Rowena,
board . onn,
descripti,m
of -7-arse :'-'-'—'wa; s—hould be rc.coinmentled by-the beneficed curates of that
tasks e 4 off Lynniouth;a. derelict, by the Coast Gu3a,rd ;18 r deanery. It was contended that this
el.
ga obo„"Palm oil, and. seven bags of nuts, have ween washed applied to one class. of persons only, naiu y,
shore, and secured
t?.ll:etticK) N". '21—Sea Lark, bound to Tralce, reported
4r.
it
~); . bottom 351. per annum. It appeared to hire that thesel
those whose incomes did not exceed the abovoerassurien.,
tun ba caPsized near Ball bunion 19th inst., has drifted into
I those
r imrose upwars crew supposed to be drowned. Ifiemrrietdedtoint‘evoomcelasasseswaosf, personsTinnatmh:lyw',iltl:t-isaweno(f sueh.
Suxatu , Irvin, Quebec; Thetis, Hug, Quebec. *
shore ne 8:Yov. 24.—The cargo of the Britain, Storey, on fiweheodocbutraaitneesdotihte,hespdeeettinficerdyr., commendation of the bone
Atbeeaßr Tynemouth, is being saved.
ITQWcastle "Gil
Nov. 21—The St. Lawrence, of and from
ila,,n___ ,
hero London, was in contact with a brig and
p;t;tenap cp.iarter, but proceeded.
dtarae ou o'l., Ziov. 22.—Part of the Achillts, of St. Ives,
raw uore near Towin sands to-day crew supposed to be
iost. The Hero of Acre,of Liverpool,' was passed, 2d
arri,:orlaterlogged, dismasted,nd abandoned, by the China,
toil at Bristol.
19t4 ia,.,-N"or• 21.—The Nimrod steamer was in contact,
No; from Vali several vessels, among them the Wilhel-
sPrit uni Alexandria ; the Ann Laby which lost bow-
ii-IN_a_rul the Caroline Sescar, which bad stern stove.
to bot;"'„"P.A. Wii, Nisv.23.—The Wave, Smallman, from Quebec
off -04"...t, struck on the Arklow Bank last night, but came
yeti sent and with loss of rudder. A steamer has
lital‘",Leto tow her up.
Put intol4t, Nov. 23.—The Joana, Sims, of Dundee, which
het% uoly Island in a sinkin state, has been towed in
liaa bed is discharging The cargo of the Elsina, Luckt,
saved, but the vessel. is aeatotoal wreck.
8AR..............

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)
Mr. Edward Strutt took the oaths on his acceptance
of office as one of her Majesty's counsel.
Mr. Charles Buller, M.l'.,Judge-Advocate, was called
within the bar, he having een appointed " one of her
Majesty's counsel learned in the law."

1.1 N,

WED

1,0251. to the prosecutor, as he was enabled to identify
that much of the notes as his own. The police were at
present in search of -Fabian, but Faulkner had corn•
menced an action against the inspector to recover the
railway scrip and the remaining bank-notes, both of
which it would be absolutely necessary to produce on
the trial of Fabian, should he be taken; Under these
circumstances, he (Mr. Hill) was intrusted to apply for
an order to stay proceedings in the action until Fabian
was tried.—Application granted.

EXCHEQUER.—(THIS DAY.)
LIABILITY OF PROVISIONAL COMMITTEEMEN.
REYNELL V. LEWIS.
WYLD V. HOPKINS.
Upon entering the Court, the LORD CHIEF BARON pro-
ceeded to give judgment in these cases, as follows :
In these cases which have lately been areued before
us we think the plaintiffs seek to fix upon the defendants
the liability of contracts, expressed or implied, and the
question for the decision of the Court is, whether such
contract was made by the defendant himself, or his
agent, with the plaintiff, or his agent. This is a slues,
tion of fact for the consideration of the jury, from the
evidence before them, and it will be for the plain-
tiff to produce the proof in all these cases,
in order to show that the defendant had en-
tered into such contract, expressed or implied
expressly by making a contract with the plaintiff, im-
plied by giving the order to him under such circum-
stances as would warrant the plaintiff in concluding, by
reasonable inference, that he was liable ; and if the con-
tract is not proved to be made with the defendant per-
sonally it must be proved to be made with an authorised
agent on his behalf. In the case of a number of actions
brought against provisional committeemen it often
happens that the contract is made by a third party, and
in such cases the point to be decided is, whether such
third person was the agent for the defendant for the
purpose of making such contracts, and whether the
plaintiff entered into the contract as such. Again, the
order may be conveyed by an express authority on the
part of the defendant with such third person to make
such contract on his behalf, but he may not give him a
a general authority to make general contracts on his
behalf; or it may be enough to show that a general rule
exists. In point of law, this would be sufficient to prove
the affirmative on the part of the plaintiff, as, for
instance, in the case of a partner, when their
relations are complete, one becomes, in law,
the agent of the other in all purposes, which are
necessary for their mutual interests, or the relation of
husband and wife, in which the law considers that the
husband makes his wife the agent, and in all cases the
husband is bound by such contract. This agency may
be constituted by the immediate action of the parties,
that is, by merely giving authority to the agent, or re-
presenting any relation to exist between the parties
similar to that which the law recognises and makes, or
by representing the defendant to the plaintiff as the
party making the contract, and that such third person
was his recognised agent, or that he had relations to
create him such ; and if the plaintiff really makes the
contract upon the faith of the defendant's representa-
tions, the defendant is then made the party to such
contract, and the representatives of authority upon the
part of the third party pro ad hoc, asseTes that the re-
lations of agent are established between these. These
representations may be made direct to the plaintiff, or
made so public as to have reached him, or it may he
made by word or by actual contrast. In all such cases
it will be for the jury to find upon the evidence with the
assistance of the judge who may try the case. There are
few, if any, of the cases which have come before us in
which the contract is entered into directly by the de-
fendant, but they have been entered into by other pare
tied. In one case it was attempted to be proved by a
conversation in which the defendant expressed his entire
satisfaction et the expenditure which had been going on,
he said the expenses were moderate, and that was evi-
dence ,to go to the jury, and entitled to more
or less weight according to the circumstances of
the case. tut the chief point of Mr. Martin's argu-
ment was, that the relation of a provisional committee-
man constituted an association or quasi copartnei ship,
in which he was an agent for all the purposes, and liable
for all the expenses incident to the preliminary proceed-
ings in obtaining an Act of incorporation; and that the
mere fact of his being a co-promoter was evidence to go
to a jury, that lie had authorised the contracts
to bo entered into, and insisted that if there
were no other evidence than the mere fact of
the defendant having joined the provisional committee,
yet that that was sufficient evidence to go to a jury to
prove the liability of the defendant, and his being a
party to the contract, and that authority was given by
the defendant to every other provisional committeeman
of the same company, to bind him for any contract
connected with the Company, and that the solicitor in
the suit bad the power to give any orders, and thereby
bind the defendant. We think that no such consequence
follows as res matter of law. The mere fact of the
defendant being a provisional committeeman, such
agreement amounted to no more than a mere
promise on his part to the effect " I will
act with other persons for the purpose of
carrying forward some scheme," it may be in
a committee or in any other body who have taken upon
themselves to perform that duty subject to the approval
of the general body, the acts are to be confirmed by the
great body whom they propose to act fur. The agree-
ment to be a committeeman is an agreement to carry out
a certain scheme under such circumstances as may have
given rise to the scheme. The objects of a provisional
committee may be various, it may be to establish
an hospital, or any other charitable institution,
to which persons are to subscribe, either for a charitable
motive or any other, it may be to establish a school, or
a place of meeting, in which the persons subscribing are
to have beneficial interest as shareholders. It may be
that a provisional committee is formed for the purpose of
oicecaamscohlan—lacnmadkaarimseil t
cases,
, charitable
occasions
tnotnosbtherseorl
eese:d:i railway.namiffppaolerernrrogodepp whatever
eeernreioptconsequences
njt
bohusi ,tteceVehdi
hvgtiehechauaesroeesit
bneti
jou
iebebencjmsrl
relationstee
t:ahttyhaeo
oherfaefeemexocacitbosnhi jtretdheedee
memberckt s
obtaining an Act for the construction of a bridge, a
mtya oyolaft6eatihniet,
minds
nuopgfpsaoart
nhtmyoeess *ti
itynee
who may have to dispose of the facts of the case. Such
associations as provisional committees constitute, how-
ever, no agreement to share in the profit or loss of the
concern, which constitutes the real essence of partnership.
It would be absurd to suppose that such a relation was
meant to be made in any case in which a provisional
committeeman consented to act as such. Now, applying
these cases, in some cases there- is evidence, beyond the
mere fact of the defendant being a member of the pro-
visional committee, there are some instances where the
question does not seem to rest upon the same grounds,
and where there is evidence that the defendant has not
only consented to act as a provisional committeeman,
but.has actually authorised his name to be inserted in
the prospectus of the company. Now, in some of
these prospectuses there are certain persons described
as the acting committee, and in which there
appears also the names of the solicitor, and the
secretary to the company. In some prospectuses
it is stated what are the duties and functions,
and what the objects of the provisional com-
mittee; such prospectuses have, in many cases, been
circulated by the defendant's express consent, and the
jury would presume that if such prospectus were taken
to the plaintiff, and that it bad been showed to him,
and that he had acted upon such prospectue in the per-
formance of his contract; and the question. therefore,
is, what inference should reasonably be drawn from the
contents of such a prospectus. This would of course de-
pend entirely upon the terms of such prospectus, if it
stated the mere names of the committee, and nothing
more ; and if no light could be derived from it with
reference to the intentions of the committee, then it
does not alter the liability of the defendant, and he can-
not be responsible as a mere member of the committee;
and the publication of the fact cannot therefore alter his
position or relation. In some cases, however, there are
acting committees, who take the whole management; of
the concern instead of the provisional commit.
tee. The functions of the provisional committee
having ceased, or in such cases it may mean that the
provisional committee have appointed an acting come
mittee to act on their behalf, and to be their agent. In
that case the provisional committee would be clearly
liable for the acts of the acting committee. Again,ldo
such prospectuses mean where the solicitor or the se-
cretary's name is inserted, that such persons are regu
larly employed or appointed by the provisional cos-
mittee, or by the acting committee, on their behalf v
?
Tsinheenss, again,
a
ni anothertach questionto
therises;
what
or bthu"
secretary in question. In all those cases the results
must depend upon the particular terms of each prospectus,
and the reasonable inference to be drawn therefrom.
e
Now, applying these observations to the two cases which
have alone been argued before us, Reynell v. Lewis and
Wyld v. Hopkins, we are of opinion that in the
first case there was some evidence to go to the
jury, we think that the manner in which the question
was left to the jury was perfectly correct, but we think
there should have been a new trial upon payment of
costs, but we think that a new trial should be had
evenett e
jury; the case " Wyld v. nor
and
in order that the jury may have the opportunity of
considering the facts of the case, according to
the i view e f
to the
go Court.oh
kins," we Entertain much doubt whether there was any
d
that in the case of "-Wyld v op kips " a new trial
should be had
geraerally upon the whole merits of the
case. .we therefore,

`WHITE V. HARDING.
In this cause, which was tried before Mr. Baron Platt
at the Middlesex sittings at Nisi Prins, a verdict for 501.
was returned for the plaintiff, for a series of assaults
committed upon the plaintiff, who was a process server.
Mr. liistowLus a few da3s since obtained a rule nisi
for a new trial, on the ground of surprise.
Mr. CHAMBERS and another Learned Gentleman bay-
in v 4 been heard against • the rule, and Mr. KNOWLES in
support er it,

The COURT ordered the rule to be discharged.
BUSINESS OF TUE CounT.---The clerk of the court
rave notice, that on Saturday next the Court would pro-
ceed to give judgment in ail the causes now standing for
judgment on the new trial paper.

COMMON PLEAS.—(THIS DAY.)
The Right lion. Charles Buller M.P., was this morn-
ing called within the bar as one of the Queen's Counsel.
RE lIENSWORTII.
The defendant, who had bern attacT)ed for contempt.
in refusing to deli-er up certain wine vvalertuits, in com-
pliance with an award which had been •,to:sde ordel (.1
Court, was this morning brought up f or juAgmeDt.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said the hrpioo' ease came
before the Court on the report of
'ca.ster, in which
the defendant was taken up 0, an attachment
for a contempt of Court,
With .regard to the
interrogations on which,
attachen
pe plaintitrin
roceeded, it
Ny-as shown that the "..41efendant , formerly tth
the co§e, - el, 'which the present • :Oceeding had