The Sun.
London, England, 1859-01-20 00:00:00

WARE MARKET.-(THIS DAY.)

ORDINARY SHARES AND STOCKS.

FOREIGN

Railwa A Closing I Business
ys. pad, Price. Done.

Can.° 0v.6 p.c.Ja. & July
Do. 6 p.c.Fb.&Aug.
Do. 6 p.c.Mr. Az Sep.
N. B.Clint.6p.o. Ja. AtJuly
Do. 6 p.c.Ap. & Oct.
N. S.W. Gov. sp. c. Deb.
NovaScotliGov.6 p.c. St.
Deb. redeemable, 1875
S. AUS.G t. 6 pc. Jan &Jul y
Vict*Gov.Gp.c.Jan&July

38 40
10 12
I}ll
20 21
gi
1 d
I itiP
41 51
1 11
24 3

[T SECU:

Closing
Prices.

1121 113
114 115
114 115
110 111

994 1001
110 111
109 111

JOINT-STOCK BANKS.

1131 13
1101

9911001

Joint-Stock Banks. !Paid. Closing Business
Price. Done.

Agra&UnitedSerViceßk
Australasia
Bank of Egypt
Bank of London
Brit. Col. Bk. & LoanCo
British North American
Chtd. Bank of India, &c
City
Colonial
Corn. Bank of Canada
Commercial of London
Eng., Scot., & Aus. Ch
Gen. Bk. oSwitzerland
Lon.Char.lik.otAustral.
London and County
London Joint Stock
London & Westminster
Nat. Prov. of England
Do. new
National Bank

91 93
27 27i
49 61

58 60
2 14d

63 65

16} 171
211 22

INew South Wales

100
loo; !

48 48

Share

Orient. Bk. Corporation
Ottoman Bank
Provincial of Ireland
Do. New

100
101
Stock

204 21
6.1 60

South Australia
Do. New

APPEAL.-..ItiViLAND V. MORTIBOY.

Union of Australia
Do. New
Union of London
Unity Mutual
Western Bk of London

19 -1-7 (1

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

Zuvin:dos done

11 4

Stock)

n I

Remanded.

THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY 'EVENING JANUARY 20, 18.Eo,

LAW LATT.ELLIGENC.A'.-( THIS DAY,)

COURT OF CHA.NCERY.
(Before the Lord Chancellor and Lords Justices.)

The question in contention in this ease is, whether the
plaintiff's sister, and next of kin of the late Mr, John Shep-
herd, George-street, Euston.sqUare, is entitled to £6,000,
being one-half of his personal estate at the time of his death,
the plaintiff having already received the other half.

'ice-Chancellor Sir Sohn Stuart found that the plaintiff
was also entitled to this sum of £B,OOO.

The defendant, Mr. Mortiboy, appealed, but the plaintiff
stands as appellant, and defendant as respondent.
The evidence in the causo having been concluded yes-
terday,

Mr. John Drake Coleridge, for the defendant, resumed
his address to the Court upon the import of the evidence
in the cause this morning. The learned counsel, in a clear
and lucid statement of the case, contended that the balwee
of evidence produced was in favour of the dePaidant,
and showed that Mrs. Mary Shepherd. Was lawflilly
married to the late Mr. John Shepherd, and to
no other person. That the alleged statements made
by the two servants, Hannah Hawkins and Ann
Wood, that Mrs. Shepherd told them that she had
been previously married to Mr. Masters, was not true, but
was contradicted by the surrounding facts and circum-
stances of the case. It was equally untrue that Mrs.
Shepherd was married to Jones, or Ward, or any other
but only to Mr. John Shepherd. The defendant, Mr'
Mortiboy, is trustee for Mrs. Shepherd, and the legality of
his claim to the £6,000 in question depends on the validity
of the Marrlago of Mrs. A. Shepherd at St. Pancras Mirth
in 1824, which is disputed by the plaintiffs.
Mr. Malins, Q.C., is now being heard in reply for the
plaintiffs upon the whole ease,

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Evans.)
IN 112 CALVERT AND CO.
To-day was appointed for hearing' a trader debtor's sum-
mons, taken out against Messrs. Calvert and Co., brewers,
by Mr. F. Hunt, of Mina-road, Old Kent-road. James
Smith, of Colford-street, Holton, and James- Mason, of
William-terrace, Fairfield-road, Bow, journeymen binders,
who claimed a sum of £529 Ba. The ease possesses some
interest from the fact that since the trader debtor's sum-
mons was taken out, on the 30th December last, Messrs.
Calvert have filed a deed of arrangement under the 6-7ths
clause, and the trustees or inspectors yesterday filed a cer-
tificate that 6-7ths of the creditors are above £lO each, had
signed the deed, this being done in accordance with sec. 226
of the Bankruprcy' Consolidation Act, which, in effect,
makes the deed prima fade evidence in courts of law and
equity, and in case the summons was answered by an affi-
davit that there was a good defence to the action. The exist-
ence of the deed was referred to, on which

.RAILWAY INTELLIGENCE.

Mr. C. Lewis, who appeared for the petitioning creditors,
who dissented from the deed, said that as no affidavit had
been made that there was a good defence:to the action, he
must ask for a bond.

His Honour refused. Ho would not make an order on
Lose disputed oases.
The summons was then dismissed.

SECONDARIES' COURT.
(Before Mr. Secondary Potter and a Jury.)
SINGULAR ACTION AGAINST A MILITARY OFFICER.—
DAmAgts £6OO.—BASTARD V. LOFTUS.
Plaintiff is a widow lady of considerable property, and
defendant is a lieutenant-colonel of militia, residing at
Spilsby, in Lincolnshire. The action was brought to re-
cover damages sustained by reason of the detention by
defendant of certain articles deposited with him by plaintiff,
and which he has neglected to return. No one appeared
for defendant, wh9 suffered judgment to go by default.
Counsel for plaintiff said that she was a widow lady
of good family and independent property. Amongst
other articles, she was at one time possessed of a
most valuable set of massive silver plate. This plate
was very old-fashioned, and much Ir.ore valuable
than similar articles now manufactured. From some cause
or another she, being about to procerxt on the continent,
was desirous of parting with thlts property, and having
known the defendant for so ;le time, she entrusted him
with the plate, and instruAed him to sell it for her if he
could. Upon her rot am from the continent, she found
that defendant had dot sold the plate, and not wishing then
to part with it; he asked defendant to return it. She was
put off witt txcuses from time to time. At one time she
should have it the next day, and at another time he
wrote that having lost a son she could not expect him then
to trouble about a set of plate. Finally, much against her
will, plaintiff had been driven to the present course. He
(the learned counsel) repeated that he had not the evidence
of a silversmith to offer to prove the value of the plate.
Neither could he give the weight. Mrs. Bastard having
had to do with an officer and a gentleman, had not taken
steps that would have proved most protective to herself.
As it was, however, the jury would receive such evidence as
he could give, and they would give the highest sum, as there
was no proof that plaintiff's value was an incorrect one. Some
years'ago, a chimney sweep found a diamond in the street,
and there beineno owner he was adjudged the rightful
possessor. He took the diamond to a silversmith, and
offered it for sale, but the silversmith, thinking it a good
opportunity to do the poor sweep, kept the diamond, and
refused to render any account of it. Upon this an action
was brought, and the silversmith refusing to produce the
diamond, it was valued as a brilliant of the first water. In
the present case defendant raused to produce the plate
that had been entrusted to him, and he (the counsel) called
upon the jury to give plaintiff the sum she claimed.
Evidence having been given of the above facts, and the
learned Secondary having summed up,
The jury found for plaintiff—damages, £6OO.

SHERIFFS' COURT.
(Before Mr. Prendergast, Q.C.)
A BARGAIN'S A BARGAIN.--CIIILD V. SISSON.
This was an action to recover £7 12s. 6d. for two cwt. of
Lemon peel, 70s. per cwt.

Plaintiff stated that he was a manufacturing confectioner,
and in December last year had in his stock nearly half a
ton of lemon peel ready for candying. A person named
Raymond called upon plaintiff and said he thought he could
find a purchaser for the peel, and offered 655. per cwt. for
it. Plaintiff declined to take this, and said he would sell at
705., and allow Raymond 2s. per cwt. for his trouble.
A sample was taken by Raymond to defendant, a large
confectioner in Bishopsgate-street, and an order given.
Two hundred weight of the peel was sent in, but defendant
found fault and refused to accept any more. He offered
a price, but as peel at that time would be worth 905., and
the price asked was low, he (plaintiff) did not think he was
called upon to ask a lower figure than 70s.
Raymond was called, and swore to these facts.

Mr. Beard, for defendant, said the facts were widely dif-
ferent from these. Mr. Sisson never recognised plaintiff in
the matter, and dealt only with Mr. Raymond, who, upon
calling with the sample, assured him (defendant) that the
peel was ready for candying. Indeed, in the first instance,
the peel was not offered to defendant for sale, but Raymond
asked him what would be his charge for candying it. De-
fendant said ho should rather buy the peel gut and out, and
after candying charge Raymond the lowest price. The peel
was sent in, but instead of its being fit for candyingl
it would be at least four days before that process could be
gone on with, and then defendant would be put to consider-
able extra expense. Finding this to be the case, defendant
at once communicated with Raymond, and insisted that the
peel should be taken away ; but Raymond asked him to
keep it, and said he should have it at a price. The peel at
the outside was worth 455.

Defendant was called, dud two witnesses also, who de-
posed to the above factn, and that the peel was not worth
70s.

To answer this plaintiff said peel was very scarce, and
defendant had got the peel a bargain.
Mr. Beard would assure his Honour that not one piece
had defendant been able to use.

His Honour thought that defendant had not derived any
benefit from his bargain; but a bargain is a bargain, and
defendant must be bound by his.
Verdict for plaintiff.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.-(TIIIS DAY.)

ROBBING A PHOTOGRAPHIC ARTlST.—Charles Clark, a
respectable -looking young man, residing at 6, Pleasant-row,
Stoke Newington, assistant to Mr. Charles Stanley Herve,
photographic miniature painter, of 256, Oxford-street, was
charged with stealing a photographic lens, &c., the pro-
perty of his employer.
The prosecutor said the prisoner was in his employ as an
assistant up to Saturday last, and while he was in his em-
ploy, about a fortnight, he missed several small articles,
such as cases, in consequence of which ho spoke to another
assistant, telling him to observe the prisoner, and, having
done so, the lens in question was yesterday missed.
George Frederick Kirkwood, assistant to the prosecutor,
said that the previous morning he missed the lens, and told
his employer. The prisoner happening to call in the after-
noon he told him to wait till Mr. Herve came in, and when
he did so he said to the prisoner, " We want that lens."
At first the prisoner denied all knowledge of it, but on his
employer telling him to fetch up the officer who was below,
the prisoner said, "If you'll wait till to-morrow morning
I'll produce it." He was then given into custody.
Frank Gillaird, assistant to Mr. Gill, pawnbroker, of 8,
Hampstead-road, produced the lens pawned by the prisoner
on the 18th of January, for 7s.

Prisoner said it was his own property, and bought in the
city, and there were hundreds like it, but the prosecutor
positively swore to it from marks on it.

Mullard, 339 A, asked for a remand, as he understood
there was a previous conviction for a similar committal
while he was employed on Tower-hill,

Gill, a tinplate-worker, in Fore-dtv jet, Limehouse, and he
had been away from hini some tim a in consequence of very
severe illness. He recently Were d his services to his mas-
ter, who requiredhirn to work P,...0m six in the morning till
eight at night; which was mo-:re than he was able to do.
Mr. Yardley thought it u• t'
to require a giow-
ing youth to work for more. than 12 hours per day, includ-
ing meal times, even if he..was in good health, but he should
certainly say, from the Appearance of the lad, that eight or
ten hours per day wa 4 all that 'could be reasonably required
of him. The lad pr.c in a certificaiz signed by Dr. Richard-
son, of the Dis7eensary for Diseases of the Chest, in the
City-road, sta";ing that he coul only work from eight to
ten hours :per day.
Mr. ardley said a master had no right to kill an ap-
prentie9. If thP lad was overworked and died in conse-
quence, the master would be liable to an indictment for
Inanelangtter. The boy could only be required to work
acc,ortg..l to his strength.
Ile lad said that his master's son struck him on the
head with a mallet in September, 1857, and the blow caused
concussion of the brain.
Mr. Yardley said, in the face of the certificate produced,
the boy ought not to be employed either 12 or 14 hours per
day, and granted a summons against Mr. Gill.
IMPUDENT ROBBERY.—EIIen Shea, a woman of the
town, was brought before Mr. Yardley, charged with steal-
ing sd. from P sailor named Thomas Wiley, belonging to
the collier brig Venus, lying off Stone-stairs, Ratcliff.
The prosecutor, a Newcastle m.)n, entered a public-house
with two shipmates this morning. They called fora pot
of beer, and while partaking of it, Wiley, who had been
drinking very freely, became sick. He was holding his
head down and vomiting when the prisoner put her hand
in his trousers pocket and took from it five pennyworth of
halfpence and ran away. The sailor pursued her and gave
her into custody of a policeman, who took the money from
her.

The prisoner pleaded guilty and was sentenced to two
months' imprisonment with hard labour.

MANCHESTER, SHEFFIELD, AND LIN-
COLNSHIRE.
The directors of this company have just issued
their half yearly report. It states that the directors
have pleasure in announcing that the competition
which has so long prejudicially affected the prin-
cipal railway companies has now ceased, and that
the heads of two agreements have been signed on
behalf of the Lou don and North' Western, Great
Northern, and Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincoln-
shire companies, the first under date the 26th of
November, the second the 23d of December last.
The agreements are to be taken as in operation froir,
the Ist of January, 1859. The first agreemr,mt
provides for a complete interchange of non-e-.anpe..
titive traffic at through rates, and also Provides for
equal rates for competitive traffic, to FA settled by
arbitration in case of dispute. Th s second •agree-
ment provides for a general divirAion of competitive
traffic, and for the proper IrAssage of competitive
and non-competitive traffir:, to and from Liverpool,
on agreed terms, by suf'..,n arrangements (to be sub-
mitted
to Parliamert for confirmation) as, when
fully completed, it is hoped, obviate the
necessity for air' outlay of capital by the company
between Gars'eon and Liverpool.
The iteecitints of the half year show a total
revenue from all sources of £293,399, a total ex-
Penditare of £148,846, and a balance of net profit
of X 144,553;, which, with the balance of £1,031
firm the previous half year, amounted to £145,584
'Available for interest and dividend. The de-
-1 benture and other interest-charges against the
half year amounted to £69,533, the canal an-
nuities to £13,754, the • dividend on debenture
stock to £650, the dividend on the £6 preference
shares to £23,725, the dividend on the 31- preference
stock to £2,952, the dividend on the 6 per cent.
preference stock to £26,160, and the dividend on
the new £lO redeemable 6 per cent. shares to £6OO,
making a total charge of £140,381, and leaving
£5,203 for the next half-year. The capital account
showed that £9,021,379 had been received and
£8,936,925 expended, leaving a balance of £84,514.
The revenue account for the half-year ending the
31st of December last showed that £393,400 had
been received and £148,864, or 52.35 per cent. ex-
pended, leaving a balance as above of £144,553
against £156,485 at the corresponding period
of 1857.