The Sun.
London, England, 1848-11-23 00:00:00

HAY DIALICILETS.

SMITIIFIELD.—Meadow Hay, 21 8s to 31 13s; Clover,
ditto, 31 lOs to 41 174; and Straw, 11 2s to 1/ 8s per
load. A moderate supply, and a sluggish demand.
CUMBERLAND.—Meadow Hay, 21 lOs to 31 15s ;
Clover ditto, 3/ 103 to 41 15s; and Straw, 1/ 4s to
I/ lOs per load. Supply tolerably good, and trade rather
dull.

WEITECIIAPEL.—Meridew Hay, 21 lOs to 31 15s ;
Clover ditto, 31 lOs to 51 ; and Straw, 11 3s to 1/ 9s
per load. Trade steady, at the above quotations.

CORN AVERAGES.
GENERAL AVERAGE PRICES OF BRITISH CORN
For the Week ended Nev. 23, 1848, made up from the Returns of the
Inspectors in the different Cities and Tawas In Ragland and Wales
per Imperial Quarter.
WHEAT. I BARLST.I OATS. I ZEE. I BEANS. I PEAS.
PRICE .. 152 s 3d 134 s Id 20s 5d 30s 10d 138 s Id 40s 6d

DUTIES ON FOREIGN CORN.

WHEAT. BARLEY.
Gs Od 23 Id

- - -
OATS. I ItTE. 1 DEANS. I PEAS.
2s 6d 2s Od 2s Od 2s Od

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

WATSON V. LORD CHARLETILLE AND OTHERS.

This was an action to recover a sum of money, which
had been paid by the plaintiff on scrip shares in the
Newry and Armagh Railway, of which the defendant
and others were provisional committeemen. The plain-
tiff sought to recover the money ou the ground that he
had been induced to subscribe his money by misrepre-
sentation. The verdict at the trial was found for the
plaintiff (as we understood) ; subsequently a
rule was applied for, calling upon the plaintiff
to show cause why the verdict should not be set aside
and a nonsuit entered, on the ground that the verdict
was against the evidence.
Lord DENMAN now gave the jndgment of the Court.
It appeared to the Court that there was no evidence to
show that the money found its way into the hands of
the defendants. The rule for a nonsuit must accordingly
be made absolute.

The rest of the morning was occupied with oases de-
void of general interest.

SHERIFFS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Under-Sheriff BURCHELL.)
WOOD AND OTHERS V. WILLIAMS.

The plaintiffs in this action are coal-merchants at
Northumberland-wharf, Strand, and defendant is owner
of the Fawn Margate steam-boat. The claim was for
741. 16s. 2d. for coals supplied by defendant's order,
Evidence was adduced to provo the delivery, and a ver-
dict was given for the amount claimed.

COX V. MORRIS.

The plaintiff is proprietor of the Law limes; the de-
fendant is an attorney, at present being a managing
clerk in the City. The action was brought to recover
the sum of 51. 15s. 6d. for work and labour done, and
goods sold and supplied to defendant at his request.
Evidence was adduced by which it was proved that
certain numbers of the work had been served, and also
that after the action had been brought defendant ten-
dered the amount without costs, and contended that the
action ought to have been brought in the name of Mr.
Crockford, the publisher.
For the plaintiff it was now contended, on the autho-
rity of several cases in " Chitty on Contracts," and on a
more recent case, " Brunton v. Thompson," 7 Law Times,
p. 430, in all of which it was held that even where the
name of the principal hed not been disclosed, he could
maintain an action, and that in fact it ought to be brought
in his name, and not in the ;name of the agent, which
it was contended Crocleord was, being a mere ser-
vant of the plaintiff, although his name was en-
tered at the Stamp-office, and attached to the paper
as publisher, in compliance with the law. He is also
sub-editor of the Law Times. The bills were made out
in the name of Mr. Crockford, who, however, had no in-
terest in the profits of the paper, or in any of the other
publications at the same office.
The witnesses for the plaintiff were cross-examined
rigidly on the latter points, and admitted Crockford had
demanded payment in his own name.
The UNDER-SHERIFF, in summing up, said the ques-
tion was whether Crockford had sold toe papers on his
own account. The law had been clearly laid down by
the plaintiff's attorney—if the contract had been made
substantially with the plaintiff through Crockford, and
he had not been misled, the plaintiff would be entitled to
a verdict.

The jury gave a verdict for the amount claimed.

MARLBRO' STREET-(THIS DAY.)
CAPTURE OF GAMBLERS.—James Hart, 13, White
Hart-street, Drury-lane; Thomas Dreme, cigar dealer,
24, John-st reet, Tottenh am-court- road ; Arthur Mathews,
law stationer, 27, Cumberland-street, Camberwell; John
Se) fort, 13, Sherrard-street, clerk; John Holland,
sadler, 16, Rathbone-place; James Thompson, 22, High-
street, Kensington; William Clark, 22, Porter-street,
waiter; John Saunders, 24, Commercial-road East,
tailor ; William Mordaunt, 15, Belgraye-street, Pimlico,
commission agent; William Howard, Stromboli- cottage,
Pimlico, bootmaker ; and George Caldwell, 15, Little
Guildford street, Russell-square, teacher of music; were
brought before Mr. Bingham, charged with having be en
found in a common gambling house, No. 17, Castle-
street, Leicester-square.
Mr. Henry Beresford, Superintendent of the C divi-
sion of police, said—l produce the report made by me to
the Commissioners of Police, and the order of the Com-
missioners to enter the house, No. 17, Castle-street,
Leicester-square. In compliance with this order, I went
about a quarter past nine last night to the house, ac-
companied by several constables. On arriving at the
door I found it secured by a strong chain. I knocked
several times for admission, and not receiving
any answer, I directed the constables to break
the door open, which, after some difficulty, was done. I
then went into a room on the ground-floor, where I saw
the defendants, Hart, Mathews, Seyfort, and Holland.
I directed the constables to secure them. I then forced
an entrance through a thin partition leading to
the stairs. On arriving at the top of the staircase, I
found all further ingress secured by a trap-door,
which was strongly fastened. I directed it to be
forced open by crowbars, and after some time a
hole sufficiently large was made, through which a con-
stable was put, who broke open the door with a crow-
bar. I then went into a room and found the other de-
fendants sitting round a table, covered with green
baize. There was a fire in the room, and I distinctly
saw papers burning in the grate, and a quantity of
metal in a state of fusion. I directed a con-
stable to throw some water on the fire, which
extinguished it. I then saw one of the con-
stables take the portion of the roulette-wheel: produced
from a sink in the room. I also found an engraving,
which fitted into the frame of the roulette-wheel, which
when hanging up, had all the appearance of a picture.
In' another part of the room I found the bank-boxes and
the metal produced, which was taken from under the
grate. The whole of the prisoners were then secured,
and taken to the station.
Freeman, 178 C, said, on the previous evening, about
five o'clock, I commenced watching the house in Castle-
street, and saw several of the defendants and others
knock at the door. The door was on the chain, and
when a signal was given it was opened by the defendant
Hart, the doorkeeper, and the defendants were at once
admitted. The door was then chained again imme-
diately.
Police-constable 5 C said, by the orders of my super-
intendent, I searched the ground-floor of the house in
Castle-street. In the back room I found Howard sitting
at the table, and Caldwell standing behind the door. I
took them into custody, and conveyed them to the
station.

Mr. E. J. Edwin, solicitor, 85, Long-acre, and Mr.
Ballantine, the barrister, who appeared for the defen-
dants, addressed the magistrate at some length on behalf
of their respective clients, contending that sufficient
proof had not been offered as to the house being a
common gaming-house; and that their clients were en-
titled to their discharge.
Mr. BINGHAM, after recapitulating the whole of the
evidence adduced, said he was perfectly convinced that
the house was a common gaming-house,:and that the de-
fendants were there for an unlawful purpose. As it had
been proved that Hart had acted as door-keeper, he (Mr.
Bingham) should convict him in the penalty of 1001.. or
in default to be imprisoned for six months. The others
he fined 40s. each.
Mr. Edwin said he should appeal against the sentence
upon Hart at the sessions.