The Sun.
London, England, 1834-09-18 00:00:00

suggested a course which he conscientiously believed would be
best for the Court to adopt.
Mr. FIELDER trusted that Sir ,J. Scarlett, who was pre-
sent, would not take it amiss, if he requested him to give
his opinion as to whether the transaction referred to by Mr.
Winter, was an infraction of the charter according to the Act.
Sir J. SCARLETT then came forward and stated that he un-
derstood the question to be, whether the acceptance of certain
bills of exchange, at a date of less than six months, was
an infraction of the charter. He should say that the
question turned entirely OR the meaning of the words,
" owe money upon their bills." There might be an
ambiguity whether the acceptance was the bill of the ac-
ceptor. But that question had been decided by the King's
Bench in the case of the Manchester Water-works.
In that case the Court held that the bill was the bill of the
acceptor, and taking that as an authority, he should say that
if any person at St. Alban's should draw on the London and
Westminster Bank, it would be the bill of the acceptor, and
would be a violation of the charter.
After some observations from Messrs. WINTER, YOUNG,
and BLACKBURNE, the resolution approving the proceedings of
the Directors—in opposing the London and Westminster Bank
Bill—was carried unanimously, Mr. Winter consenting to ex-
punge that part which had been objected to.
The meeting then broke up.

COURT OF COMMON COUNCIL.-(THIS DAY.

This morning a Court of Common Council was held al
Guildhall.

The LORD MAYOR, attended by. Aldermen Kelly, Cowan,
and Harmer, took the Chair at one o'clock.
Several petitions were presented of no public interest : they
were referred to the Committee for General Purposes.
The Report from the City Lands' Committee, with respect
to Smithfield, was brought up and read. After setting forth
the labours of the Committee before the Committee of the
House of Commons with respect to the Islington Market Bill;
which terminated in its rejection, it recommended the widen-
ing and improving of Smithfield Market, by purchasing certain
houses on the north side, at an expense estimated by their sur-
veyor at 71,1001.
The CHAIRMAN of the Committee moved that the Report
be referred back to the Committee to be acted upon, and the
recommendations carried into effect.
The motion was seconded, when
Mr. JONES hoped that a report of such vast importance
would not be hurried through in such a hasty manner. He
would move that it lay on the tahle till a future day, in order
to give time for the Council to receive the Report of the
Finance Committee relative to the intended new street from
the end of Farringdon-street. From his local knowledge, as
well as from information received from the salesmen in the
market, he fully believed that the much better plan would be
to make the improvements on the western side in place
of the northern, as that would give greater facilities_ to the
immense droves of cattle every day driven off towards
the west end, and also join admirably with the intended new
street, while, by the plan proposed by the report, no other ob-
ject would be effected than the mere enlargement of the market.
He trusted his motion would be agreed to, for the Court
could not be so well acquainted with its details as they ought
to be before agreeing to it. He then moved, as an amend-
ment, that the the report do lie on the table.
Mr. WIRE seconded the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN of the City Lands Committee then rose,
and was left speaking.