The Sun.
London, England, 1848-11-13 00:00:00

WOOL.

Last week's imports of Wool into London were confined
to 280 tons from Hateburgb, 219 ditto from Odessa, and
30 ditto from hares. The supplies of Wool on offer i❑
the private contract market are very extensive; yet the
demand must be considered tolerably steady, at prices
nearly or quite equal to those paid at the last public
sales.

TALLOW.
Notwithstanding the heavy stock, and the continued
large arrivals, the demand for Tallow is tolerably steady
at last week's quotations. P.Y.C. on the spot is selling
this morning at 455, and for forward delivery at 44s 6/1
per cwt. Town Tallow is 45s per cwt, net cash ;
Rough fat, 2s 7d per Blbs. Accounts from St. Peters •
burgh state that the total shipments this season will be
from 128,00 C to 130,000 casks. The Russians were
shipping rapidly, and prices varied from 128 to 132
roubles.

CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
The Lord Chancellor sat to-day shortly after ten
o'clock, in the Old Hall, Lincoln's Inn.

SOWERBY V. GIITTERIDGE.—jUDGMENT.
The LORD Cia.t.NeELLon gate judgment to-day in this
case, which came before him upon appeal from the Vice-
Chancellor of England, dismissing the plaintiff's bill.
The question in the case related to a share claimed by
the plaintiff in certain copyhold propirty. His Lord-
ship thought the course pursued by the Court below
perfectly correct, and dismissed the appeal with costs.
Judgment affirmed with costs.
LORD V. THE COPPER MINERS' COMPANY.

This case came before the Court upon two appeals
from the decision of the Vice-Chancellor. Knight Bruce,
overruling two demurrers put in by the defen-
dants to the plaintiff's bill. The Copper
Miners' Company was constituted a corporation
by letters patent of .August 3. 1691, -and the object of
the suit was to have it declared that the Court of Assist-
ants of the company had no power to create a valid
charge upon the company, by loan notes, otherwise than
by debentures sealed with their common
.seal; and that
all securities purporting to charge the company other
than such debentures might be delivered.up to be can-
celled; and to have it also declared that the Court of
Assistants had no authority to raise, by the issue of pre-
ferential shares, any greater sum than 400,0001. with-
out the sanction of the shareholders; and to obtain a
declaration that a mortgage by the company of the Bank
of England had been improperly obtained, and was
void. The bill also prayed that the Bank of England
might be restrained from suing out execution on a judg-
ment entered up by them against the mining company,
on a warrant of attorney given by the latter c maptuty
to the Bank. The bill was filed by one of the share-
holders on behalf of himself and the other corpora.
tore, except such of them as were defendants. Ac-
cording to the statements of the bill the plaintiff in
1846 had allotted to him 200 preferential shares ;
that in October, 1847, the Court of Assistants had exe-
cuted an instrument purporting to be a mortgage of the
property of the company to the Bank of England for
270,000 i. The bill also stated that the Court of Assist-
ants had raised considerable sums on the security of
lodn notes, and the five of the defendants who wore
shareholders were holders of large numbers of such
notes; that fifty other shareholders also, held such notes,
but that their interests were sufficiently represented by
the five defendants in question. The bill charged that
the transaction with the Bank of England was unautho-
rised by the charter, and was not binding on the com-
pany, and that the Bank had notice that,the parties were
officers of the mining company, who were trustees for
the plaintiff and the other shareholders; and had also
notice that the Court of Assistants were acting contrary
to their duty, and in derogation of the rights of the
plaintiffs and the other shareholders. To this bill the
defendants demurred; and upon the .demurrer coming
on for argument before the Vice-Chancellor he over-
ruled them, and from that decision the present applica-
tion was brought.
The arguments in the case occupied the Court the
whole morning.

ROLLS' COURT --(THIS DAY.)
His Lordship the Master of the Rolls was occupied
the whole morning with notions of no general interest.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.)
SAUNDERS V. SCOTT.
The further arguments in this part heard cause occu-
pied his Honour the whole morning.
(Before the Vice-Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE.)
His Honour heard causes to-day, but no ease calling
for a particular report came before the Court during
the day.
(Before the Vice-Chancellor WfastAm.)
His HoNoun, after disposing of the'ease of Stanisland
v. Willatt, in which he directed a reference to the
Master to approve of a proper security for the payment
of an annuity by the defendant of upwards of 6001.,
and continued the injunction restraining the defendant
from parting with certain shares in the East London
Water Works Com
pany, proceeded to hear causes.

QUEEN'S BENCII.—(THIS D Ay.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
THE OFFICE OF CONSTABLE—THE QUEEN U. BOOTH.
In this case a rule had been issued calling upon the
defendant to show cause why en informAtion in the na-
ture of a quo warranto should not be exhibited against
him, calling upon him to state upon what authority he
holds the office of constable of the township of Sowerby,
in the West Biding of Yorkshire.
Mr. KNowLEs showed cause against the rule. He
said it had been obtained by his Learned Friend Mr.
Hudilestone, on the ground that the appointment was in-
valid, as the defendant's name did not appear in the list
sim
of persons properly, qualified to hold
The the office according
to the sth and 6th Vic., question c..
p le
in-
volved in the case was whether, under the Act,
it was necessary that the name of a person appointed
a constable's substitute should appear in the list
which the overseers are directed to make out of
properly-qualified persons, from which the justices make
their selection. A gentleman of fortune named Clarke
offered himself for the office. The justices, with whom
the confirmation of the appointment lies, expressed some
d.ubt whether a gentleman of Mr. Clarke's standing
would serve their rescripts and perform the other
duties incidental to the office. He immediately said, in the
event of his due appointment to the office he should select
Booth as his substitute. This was accordingly done.
The Act said substitutes might be appointed, but was-
silent as to whether they should be on the list or not.
Able-bodied persons, rated to the poor at more than
41. a year, were declared eligible for the office of con-
stable. Now Booth was rated at 291., and was an ab)e-
bodied person, of the proper age. Ile contended that the
appointment was good, and that the rule must be dis-
charged.
Mr. ITUDDLESTONE followed in support of the
rule. lie said it had been obtained at the instance
of some of the inhabitants of the township, not for the
purpose of depriving Booth of his office, but to prevent
private arrangements of an improper nature with the
person elected to fill the office of constable. If such
arrangements were permitted, persons of bad character,
disqualified from temper and other causes, might be ap-