The Sun.
London, England, 1846-12-17 00:00:00

MARKET NEWS.-(THIS DAY.

NAY DIA.V.IILETS.
SMITHFIELD.---Meadow Hav, 2/ 5s to 41 ; Clover ditto,
5.3 to 4/ I7s ; and Straw, 1/ -8s to 1111 s per load. Supply
but moderate, and trade rather dull.
CUMBERLAND. —Meador. Hay, 2/ 8s to 41 ; Clover
ditto, 31 5s to 41165; and Straw, 11 lOs to 11 13s per load.
Trade dull, at the above quotations.
WIIITECHAPIL.—Meadow Hay, 2/ 5s to 41; Clover
ditto, 3/ 8s to 5135; and Straw. l/ 8s to 1/ lOs per load.
A full average supply, and a sluggish demand.
MEAT ItilLitir.Zl S.

SOUTH ALL, DEC. 16.—We had a very large market to-day.
Hence the demand was heavy, on the following terms :
Beef, from 2s 10d to 4s 4d ; Mutton, 3a 10d to 5s ; Veal,
4s to 4s 8d ; and Pork, 4s to 4s 6d per Sibs.
ROMFORD, DEC. 16.—Prime Beasts and Sheep were in
good request; but all other kinds of fst stock ruled dull.
Beef, from 3s to 4s 4d ; Mutton, 4s to 5s 2d ; Veal, 4s to
4s 8d; and Pork, 4s to 4s 6d per 81bs. Suckling Calves,
18s to 30s ; and quarter-old store Pigs, 16s to 20s ; and
Mulch Cows, with their small Calf, 161 to 191 each.
'AWES, DEC. 15.—The prize animals cold at high rates,
but all other stock hung on hand. Beef, from 3s 4d to 4s
4d; Mutton, 4s 2d to 5s 6d; Veal, 4s to 4s 6d; and Pork, 4s
to 4s 6d per Blbs.
NEWGATE AND LDA.DENNAZIL.
We had a steady trade, at full prices. Beef, from 2s 8d
to 3s 8d; Mutton, 3s 8d to 4s 8d; Veal, 3s 10d to 4s 8d;
and Pork, 3s 8d to 4s 10d per 81bs by the carcass.

CORN AVERAGES.
GENERAL AVERAGE PRICES OF BRITISH CORN
For the Week ended Dec. 17, 1846, .nade up from the Returns of the
Inspectors in the different Cities and Towns in England and Waits
per Imperial Quarter.

WHEAT. 1 BARLEY. OATS. 1 RYE. BEANS. I PEAS.
PRICE .. 1608 3d 43s Id 26s 54 42s lid 45s Od 48s 7d
DUTY... 48 ,td 2s Oct is 6d 2s Od 2s Od 28 Od

)0t" .',4v : 'N44,0 ' ,:-.'l:. 4A . OW. - ,
41,14. )P1 U
.ZOlllOll

CHANCERNI-(THIS DAY.)
The Lord Chancellor took appeal motions and appeals
to• day.
Ilis Lordship was occupied the whole morning with
the appeal motion of Rugby v. Strongways.

ROLLS' COURT.(THIS DAY.)
COLEMAN V. THE DIRECTORS OF THE EASTERN CoUNTIES
RAILWAY COMPANY.—IMPORTANT JUDGMENT.
His HONOUR delivered judgment in this case to-day,
which came before the Court upon a motion on the part
of the defendants to dissolve an injunction that had been
obtained by the plaintiff. The question at issue was one of
he greatest importance to the public. There were five
parties to be considered in this matter :—the Eastern
Counties Railway Company, the Eastern Union Railway
Company, the Harwich Steam-packet Company, the
plaintiff, and the public. The plaintiff was a shareholder
In the Eastern Counties Railway, which by its Act was
invested with very extensive powers. Railways were of
so comparatively recent au existence that neither the Le-
gislatur.- nor courts of law had been able to consider those
powers in all the lights, relations, and operations in
which they should be regarded, to enable them to be
correctly dealt with. However, general princip:es
must be applied to them where such were appli-
cable. To look at a railway as a common
partnership would be hardly sufficient to estimate
it, its powers being so vast, and the exercise of them
so influential on private and public interests. The Act,
in his opinion, gave no further powers to railway com-
panies than it stated, or, at all events, than were necessary
for carrying out what was set forth, which latter was
not always very clear. It hod been stated that power
was given to railway companies to enter into new trans-
actions, and it had been contended that they were em-
powered to use the funds of the company in any way
they thought was calculated to increase the traffic of the
undertaking. But in no Act on the subject was there
power given of the nature contended for. He did not
mean to enter into the question of the advantage which
the project, proposed by the defendants, might confer
on the railway or the public. It might even be
a national benefit, but in effecting it the directors would
be dealing with millions of the capital of the railway
under their direction. They would be applying this to
the support of the Harwich Stearn-packet Company to
an extent of 150,0001. or 300,0001. But they not only
proposed to do this by giving an interest of 5 per cent.
out of the funds of the railway company, but they even
guaranteed to secu:e, from the same tource, those who
should embark in this steam-packet company, against
all loss in the event of its failure. Now, there was
nothing in the Act of Parliament to authorise this lie
did not attach mush importance to the consent Of the
majority at a meeting to embark in the proposed
undertaking, for it could not confer legality upon that
which they had no authority or power to perform. Be-
sides, it was well known that the motives which fre-
quently obtained acquiescence in certain speculators,
were no other than an extravagant cupidity to obtain a
larger return than they were at present realising, or a
terror of entering into a contest with those who
were more powerful than themselves. From these con-
siderations he would not dissolve the injunction.

VICE.CHANCERY.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before the VICE• CHANCELLOR OF ENGLAND.)
MS Honour the Vice-Chancellor of England took
causes to-clay, but no case calling for a particular report
came before his Honour during the morning.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Sir J. K. BRUCE.)
ATTORNEY•GENERAL V. LUCAS.
This was a petition on which exceptions were taken to
the Master's report. The defendant, Mr. Lucas, had
married the daughter of the petitioners (Mr. and Mrs.
Jugo), who was only 18 years of age, and entitled to
property to the amount (:of 20,000/. The Master's finding
would, if carried out, give th.e defendant a power over
the property- of the wife,.. which, it was contended, was
at variance with the spirit and terms of the Act of Par-
liament, which provided, that a hu.sband marrying under
these circumstances should not derive any pecuniary
bene-
fit from the estate of his wife, nor be placed in a situation
to exercise any power over its. disposition. The case turned
entirely upon the construction of t,.e Act of Parliament,
which the defendant's counsel contended never contem-
plated an interpretation so stringent
as
i tha
car t oughts to
be established by the petitioners, which, f pu
would operate most injuriously, depriving the wife of the
power of rewarding her husband for kind treatment.
Mr. 'totality appeared in support of the petition, and
Mr. :Pinney for the defendant.
His Horioun deferred judgment.

QUEEN'S BENCH.—(THIS DIY')
The Judges present
The Court sat in Banco to-day,
giving judgment in everal cases.
J tice Patteson,
were—the Lord Chief Justice, Mr.. us _
• e Wightman.
Mr. Justice Coleridge, and Mr. Justice for the purpose of
THE QUEEN V. THE PARISH OF ST. PAWS,
GARDEN.—JUDGMENT.
in this
Lord DENMAN gave the judgment of the Court
of the
COVENT
case, which related to the settlement of a pauper
name of Ann Sheridan. A rule nisi had been obtained
for setting aside the order made by the magistrate.
Their Lordships were of opinion that the order of settle-
ment was correct, ordered it to be confirmed, and dis-
charged the rule.
THE QUEEN V. THE COMMISSIONERS OF SEWERS FOR
WESTMINsTER.---3IIDGMENT.
Lord DENMAN also gave judgment in this case, in
which a rule nisi had been granted for a certiorari to
bring into Court, for the purpose of its being quashed,
the presentment of a jury called by the Commissioners
of Sewers, which amerced a gentleman of the name of
Jenkins in a large amount, in consequence of his not
carrying a sewer in the neighbourhood of Westbourne.
road, to the exact orders of the Court of Sewers.
The COURT ordered the rule to be discharged, and
with costs.

THE QUEEN V. OOMPERTZ AND oTrutris.....amomENT.
Lord DENmAN also gave- the judgment of the Court
in this case, which was argued sometime since before
their Lordships upon a motion on arrest of judgment,
and also for a new trial.) fheir Lordships were of
opinion that no ground had been made for arrest
of judgment, th it the verdict with respect to Gompertz
was correct, but entertaining some doubt with respect to
its propriety as to the other defendants, they thought
a new trial ought to be grantFd.
•

DOE ON THEDEDIISE (;P PENNINGTON V. BAIIRELL.--.•

JUDGMENT.

Lord DENMAN also gave the judgment of the Court in
this case, which came before their Lordships upon 'a
motion for a new trial of an ac. ion of ejectment. The
Court was of opinion the verdict for the defendant was
correct, and ought to stand, and ordered the rule to be
discharged.
BLACK V. THE BISHOP OF NORWICH.—JUDGMENT.
Lord DENMAN also gave the judgment of the Court in
the case, discharging a rule nisi obtained by,the plaintiff
for a prohibition, with costs.
FORD V. BEACH.—JUDGMENT.
Lord DENmax also gave the judgment of the Court in
this case. Their Lordships were of opinion that the
defendant's pleas had answered the whole case made by
the plaintiff, and that the verdict should be entered for
the defendant, on the plea of set off.