The Sun.
London, England, 1866-09-22 00:00:00

FRANCE.

BOURSE, Sept. 21.—Two o'clock.—The depression
which existed yesterday has made further progress
to-day, and repeated sales have caused a further
decline. As was to be expected orders from the
provinces to sell Mexican Bonds caused that Stock
at first to be quoted lower, and the first transactions
took place at 125 f., but as soon as these orders were
executed the Bonds recovered to yesterday's prices,
viz., 132 f. 50c. French Threes were done at 69f.
35c., or 10c. lower; Italian Fives at 57f. 50c., or
a fall of 35c. ; Credit Mobilier at 670 f., or 6f. 25c.
less ; Comptoir d'Escompte at 907 f. 50c„ or a de-
.ll.c—a 9f one Railways are weak.
Three o'clock.—Scarcely any change has occurred,
the closing prices being as follows:

4i per Cents 97 25
Do. end month —

Bank Shares 3550
Italian Loan 57 60
Do. end month 57 50
Mexican Loan —
' Do. Bonds —
Spanish Threes
Home Debt —
Deferred
'AYR.

3 per Cents. 69 30
Do. end month 69 45

Credit Mobilier 672 50
Do. end month ... 673 75

Credit Fonder

Do. end month

,1380

' For Account.
Orleans BB7 50
Northern 1173 75
Lyons and Mediterranean 903 75
Southern 567 50
Western 572 50

Eastern
Sardinian
Austrian
Lombard 421 25
North of Spain ll6 25
Saragossa 152 50
Ditto to Barcelona —
Roman

540 -

EXTRAORDINARY PROCEEDING.—The foreman of
the grand jury empanelled at the present session of
the Central Criminal Court, and which body was dis-
charged from further attendance on Wednesday, came to
the court yesterday for the purpose of bringing to the no-
tice of the authorities an occurrence of a very singular na-
ture. It appeared that among the charges that were brought
before them was one against a young man named John
Creek, of a peculiar character, which it is not necessary fur-
ther to allude to, which rested entirely upon the evidence of
one witness. The Common Sergeant, in his charge to the
grand jury, referred to this case, and also to the fact that
there was only one witness to support the charge ; and he
advised them, that unless the evidence was very conclu-
sive, the better course would be for them to throw out the
bill. When the bill was returned, it was returned as a
true bill, and the prisoner was tried on Wednesday before
Mr. Justice Lush, and sentenced to 10 years' penal servi-
tude. The foreman of the grand jury having heard of
this result, now attended for the purpose of stating that
some serious mistake had taken place, for the grand
idly, after carefully sifting the evidence, had come to the
determination to throw out the bill. The indictment was
referred to, and it was found that it was duly endorsed
"a true bill," but the foreman still persisted in stating
that it was a mistake, and that the intention of the grand
jury was to ignore the bill, and that the endorsement upon
it must have got there by accident' in the hurry and con-
fusion of the duty in which they were engaged. The
matter was mentioned to the judges, and at first an im-
pression prevailed that the proceeding might be treated as
a mistrial, but upon consideration it was found that, upon
the face of the proceeding; they were quite legal, and that
the court had no power to interfere. The only thing,
therefore, that could be done was for the grand jury to
memorialise the Secretary of State, and this it w%s stated
would be done at once, and thus the matter rests at pre-
sent.

OVEREND, GURNEY, AND CO.'S SHAREHOLDERS.
—We would earnestly dissuade the shareholders in 0 verend
and Gurney from rushing into costly litigation, which can
end only in discomfiture and the consequent increase of
their losses. They should remember that all the expenses
must come ultimately from their pockets. They
fight the official liquidator in form, but in fact
they are fighting themselves. Perhaps the costs
may be ordered to come out of the estate ;
perhaps to be paid by the litigants. If the latter,
the fund collected for fighting is an added loss
to the subsciibers beyond their present losses. If they
should be ordered to be paid outof the estate, the result will
be that there will bo so much less of divisible assets, and
consequently so much the more to be called for from the
shareholders, and the only difference will be that, instead
of the litigants paying all, they will impose a part of the
burden upon the other shareholders, who more pru-
dently prefer to make the best of a bad matter and get
off as cheaply as possible. The opposition to the call
will raise only the question whether it is competent to
speculators to make contracts with or receive property in
trust from other persons, and then to plead some fraud
practised upon themselves as a ground for refusal to per-
form their part of the bargain, or refund the moneys they
have received from those who have dealt with them, igno-
rant of the history of the fraud. The claim is so mani-
festly inequitable that it scarcely needs the reference
we last week made .to the decided cases to show
that it has no chance of success. They must pay their
creditors—that is certain. But say they succeed in extin-
guishing the company as a corporation, would they be
better off ? Certainly not. In such case the limited lia-
bility would be lost, and they would become jointly and
severally liable to each individual creditor for the full
amount of his debt or their own fortune .—Law Times of
to-day.