The Sun.
London, England, 1867-01-22 00:00:00

Buenos Ayres 6 per Cent —
DJ 2 per Cent. (Deferred 3 per Cent.) 33
(Lillian 6 per Cent —
Do. 8 per Cent.
Do. 6 per Cent A —
Do. „ B —
Colombian; 6 per Cent.
Cuba, 6 per Cent.
Danish 3 per Cent., 1825
Do. 5 per Cent., 1864 —
Danubian Principalities
Do. Account
Equador New Consolidated, 1 per Cent.—
Do., Piovisional Land Warrant —
Do Deforied
E ;vptian 7 per Cent _
Do. Account
D )., Sec( nd 13sue B2]
i ),, ..£!1)0 Bonds
Do. Account .. —

Do.
Do. Account
Do ,tlott Bowls
Amoeunt
Do. Uovernn.ent Railway Debenturos. 801 I
Uo. Account
`lr •ek 5 per Cents., 1824-5, ex Coupuns
.)o. Coupons
Do. Account
denial:, 5 per Cent.
,iiau 5 per t 1865
Do, Account
f!o. Maretuniana Railway 561 6
Do. .A ccount.
11 dear. 3 prr Cent
Ditto for Account
Pn. 1864.,
Do. Account
Do 6 per Cent. Anglo-French
slontevidean 6 per Cent.
‘loorish Imperial 5 per Cent
'dew Granada
Do 3 per Cen
Do. Deferred
Do Laud Warrants (Hectares)
Peruvian 5 per Cent., 1865
Do-Account
Do 41 per Cent., 1865
Do Account
Do 41 per Cent. (Uribarren)
Do Account
Do 6 per Cent., 1862
Do Account
Portuguos63 per Ct., 1853 '6,'7,'9,'60,'2, '3,
Do. Account
Russian 5 per Cont., 1822, £ 5t.... BBl
Do 41 per Cent. 1850
Do 41 per Cent., 1860
Do 3 per. Cent. 1859
Do 5 per Cent. 1862
Do 5 per Cent. 1864 BBl
Do. Au 10-Dutch, 1566, all paid
'Do. do. £lO paid ll j pin
Ardinian 5 per Cent
Do. Account
Spanish 3 per Cent
Do Account
Do Now Deferred
Do. Account
Passive Do
Do Account 221 1
Spanish Cert. of Coup not funded
Do Account
Swedish 4 per Cent.
DO. 41 per Cent. 1864
Do. Scrip, £6O paid
Turkish 6 per Cent. 1854
Do. Account
Do 6 per Cent. 1858
Do. Account
Do £lOO Bonds
Do. Account

9,864

17i
11l

Do 6 per Cent. 1862
Do Account sl}
•1

54

Do £lOO Bonds .
no Account

Do 6 per Cent., 1863 —
Do 5 per Cent., 1865
Do. Account
Do. 6 per Cent., 18651 —
Do. 5 per Cent. Account —
Do. 4 per Cent. Guaranteed —
Venezuela 3 per Cent. —
Do 4100 Bonds —
Da Account
Do. 6 per Cent, 1864 3of
..
Do. Account—
_ _

Ditto 11 per Cont.
Dividends on the above payable in London.
Austrian, 5 per Cent., Ea. 10 Florins ...
Belgi.an,,4l- per cent.,Ex. 25f. .--

_
Duich 21- per (lent. Ex. 12 Guil„ —
Do. 4 per Cent. Certificates
TWO O'CLOCK.

Consols, Money 9O; /
Do. Account

LLW INTEL LIGENCE. —This Day.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

(Sittings in Banco, before the Lord Chief Baron and Barons

Channell and Piggott.)
BUTLER V. KNIGHT.

Mr. Huddestone, Q.C., appeared to-day in support of a
rule which he had obtained on Saturday calling on the
plaintiff to show cause why there should not bo a non-suit
or a new trial on the ground, in the first instance, that
there was no case to go to a jury ; next, that the verdict
was inconsistent with and against the evidence. It ap-
peared that the plaintiff, Miss Butler, had brought an
action against a party named Brough, in Staffordshire,
and that the defendant acted as her attorney in the suit.
She then commenced an action against the defendant on
the ground that he had ilfully neglected to enforce a
judgment she hid obtained in the first suit, and that he
entered into a settlement with the defendant Brough
against her instructions. The jury found a verdict
for the plaintiff, and awarded damages, which was another
ground why the learned counsel moved that the verdict
should be set aside. The learned counsel said that Mr.
Knight was one of the most respectable professional men•
in Staffordshire, and that the settlement he made was most
profitable to the plaintiff. He contended that all liabi-
lity on the part of an attorney ceased when his
client had obtained a judgment and cited, Archbold's
Practice, Chitty's edition, page 85, and several other
authorities, in support of his position. The verdict in the
first suit was for £3OO, and the compromise was for £lOO,
the attorney justifying what he had done by the fact that
the defendant had no effects and his relations advanced the
money. The plaintiff recovered damages of £2OO against
the defendant in the present suit.
The Lord Chief Baron considered that the defendant
having received instructions from the plaintiff subsequent
to the judgment in the first suit, rendered him liable
for any act he did on her behalf. He quite
agreed with the learned counsel (Mr. Huddlestone),
that, except for the compromise he made, his client
would have got nothing; but, in his opinion, he was
clearly liable to the consequences of what he had done.
Ho thought, however, that the damages were excessive
under the circumstances, and suggested they should be re-
duced by £5O.
Mr. Powell, Q.O , on the part of the plaintiff, said that he
would communicate with his client, who would probably
accede to the suggestion of the learned judge.
The other judges concurred with his lordship, and the
ease accordingly stands over until the plaintiff has decided
in respect to the suggestion of the court.