The Sun.
London, England, 1832-11-29 00:00:00

THE MARKETS.-(THIS DAY).

GENERAL AVERAGE PRICE OF BRITISH CORN,
For the Week ended Nov. 23, 1832, made up from the Returns
1 ;of the Inspectors in the different Clues and Towns in England
and Wales, per Imperial Quarter.
535. 3d.1 Oats 18s. 345. ICkl.
Barley 31s. 2d 1 Rye 325. 5d.1 Pease— 375. Ekl.
IMPERIAL AGGREGATE AVERAGES OF THE SIX WEEKS PRECEDING.
Wheat—...... 525. 7,11 Oats 18s. Bd.lßeans--- 345. 9d.
Barley i)s. ld.l Rye 325. lid I Pease 38s. 2(1.
DUTIES ON FOREIGN CORN.
Bcl.l Oats --'9s. 9,1.1 18s. 3d.
Barley 16;. 10d.1 Rye --. 21s. 3(1.1 Pease—, 12s. 6d.

HAY M A KKETN.—L At per Load of 30 Trusses.)
CUMBERLAND (LATE sr. JAMES'S.)
Coarse heavy Lowland Meadow Hay £2 10 to £2 15
klew Meadow Hay 2 15 3 15
Useful Old Ditto 2 15 3 10
Fine Upland Meadow and Rye-grass Hay 3 15 4 0
Clover Hay 4 5 5 0
Oat Straw £1 Bto £1 10 I Wheat Straw ... 1 12 1 13
Supply rather limited, trade dull, and prices stationary.
SMITHFIELD.

Coarse heavy Lowland Meadow Hay £3 0 to £3 0
New Meadow Hay 3 0 3 12
Useful Old Ditto 3 5 3 10

---- ..
Fine Upland Meadow and Rye-grass Hay 3 15 4 0
Clover Hay (extra fine)...Cs o... Generally
"at Straw ... L 1 6t9 .£1 8 I Wheat Straw 1 10 1 15
A moderately good supply, and a very dull trade ; prices as las
quoted.

SINGULAR CIRCUMSTANCE.—Mrs. MARY
TODD, a widow lady, residing at Jane's Well House, Alston,
and now in her eighty-second year, has got two new eye-
teeth ; and although they only cut a few days since, they
have grown to near perfection without having given her
the least trouble.-- Whitehaven Herald.

On the authority of Tait's Magazine—for
we are not. ourselves cognizant of the fact—the Messager
des Chambres announces to the news-lovers of Europe,
that Sir ROBERT PEEL officiates as Editor of the Morning
Post ; while " Horace Swiss (they have not exactly bit
it to a T. ), Sir Charles Wetherell, et autres jeunes
fashionables," act as redactors of the Albion

METEOR —A very brilliant meteor passed
over this town about 7 o'clock yesterday evening. It re-
sembled, we are told, a ball of fire, and shed a very vivid
light. Its course appeared to be from S. E. to N. W.
We have not heard of any one being enabled to make such
observations as to determine its height from the earth.
It was visible for about twenty seconds.— TV hiteharen
Herald.

COURT OF CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)

The Court eat at ten o'clock.

Sir EDWARD SUGDEN appeared in his place at the sit-
ting, and hoped his clients had n t been injured by his
absence. When he left town, he distinctly understood
there were to be two holydays after the last day of term ;
therefore, on going away, he made no arrangement re-
specting his business in his absence.
The Loa]) CHANCELLOR knew not how the mistake
had arisen. He thought, be had told the Vice-Chancellor, as
distinctly as he could speak, that he meant to con-
tinue sitting after Term ; yet it seemed his Honour
and the Bar pretty generally had understood there was
to be an intermission of the Sittings ; however, the only
inconvenience that had resulted from Sir Edward's alo-
sence had been on his part, and that had been in not
having heard some arguments which had been addressed
to the Court by his opponents, in some cases in which
he was, but which cases had stood over until he was
heard.
ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. MERCHANT TAILORS' COMPANY.
Sir EDWARD SUGDEN was heard in this matter,
which was opened by the other side yesterday. He
appeared for the relators. A bill of information had
bee

,n filed, and the defendants had demurred to them on the
grounds that there was a want of parties, and that the
proceedings were multifarious. The Learned Counsel
contended at some length against these two positions,
and submitted that the Vice-Chancellor's decision was
perfectly right.
Mr. ANDERDON followed on the same side. The
present mode of proceeding was the only one by which
the charity could be brought into a course to be pro-
perly administered under the decree of the Court.

Mr. KNIGHT replied—He had the utmost confidence
that the demurrer was a valid demurrer.

The LORD CHANCELLOR desired to have the paper
handed to him.

The COURT heard motions during the remainder of
the day.

KING'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)

STANDAGE AND ANOTHER, V. CRICHTON.

Mr. STURS stated the case for the plaintiffs. This was
an action brought by Messrs. Standage and Price'
auctioneers in Chancery-lane, to recover 1001. upon a
bill of exchange drawn by the defendant, Captain
Crichton, on and accepted by Lady Hyde Parker, en-
dors:d by him to Henry Gompertz, by him to Mr. Slo-
man, a sheriff's officer, and by him to the plaintiffs. The
Learned Counsel slid the Jury were probably aware, that
on action, on the same bill of exchange, was tried the
other day, when his Learned Friend, Mr. Hutchinson,
succeeded in satisfying the Jury, that the bill had been
originally tainted with fraud by other parties. In the
present case the plaintiffs had received notice to prove the
consideration. This they could readily do. As they were
bona fide holders they were entitled to recover, whatever
fraud might have been practised originally in obtaining the
bill from the defendant.

George Thomas Fawcett proved Lady Hyde Parker's
acceptance.
William Burton proved the hand-writing of the de-
fendant as drawer, and of Gompertz and Sluman as en-
dorsees.

Cross-examined by Mi. Ilutrcurwsos—Witness was
cies k to Sloman, who was a Sheriff's officer ; the plain-
tiff's were Sheriffs' brokers ; he did not know what Gan-
pertz was, but he had seen him repeatedly sign bonds in
Swim's office when he, Gompertz, had been arrested ;
he did not know that Gompertz was a horse-dealer near
the King's Bench, but believed that be (lid live some-
where near the King's Bench ; he did not remember ever
having seen Gompertz in a Court of Justice; near saw
Gompertz relative to this bill, nor did he know'that Gom-
pertz and Sloman had bill transactions together.
Thomas Btoster produced two copies of letters written
by Gompertz to give the defendant notice of the dishonour
'of the bill. One of the letters was addressed to the de-
fendant in Norfolk-street, Strand, and another to the care
of Cox and Greenwood.

Cross-examined—Witness was a commission agent ;
had no counting-house, but transacted his business on the
Royal Exchange. He knew Mr. Gompertz, who had
two houses in Portland-place, Borough road ; he lived in
both those houses. Witness believed Mr. Gampertz was
a gentleman ; be kept a carriage ; witness did not know
him as a horse-dearer; witness had often sold him wine
for his private use.
Two witnesses were called, who clearly proved that the
plaintiffs gave Sloman a check for 1001. for the bill.
Mr. HUTCHINSON for the defendant, submitted that
the plaintiffs must be nonsuited, for the notice of dis-
honour of the bill was not proved ; Gomperiz wrote two,
letters to Norfolk-street, and to Cox and Greenwood, but
there was no proof that the defendant either lived at
those places or that there was any authority to send letters
there for him.
The plaintiff's Counsel was unable to answer the objec-
tion, or to supply the deficiencies of proof; and the plain-
tiffs were then nonsuited.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-(THIS DAY.)

THE ATTORNEY• GENERAL V. CLARKE.
Sir G. GREY op•-ned the pleadings in this case and Sir
W. HORNE stated -the facts. The defendant was an auc-
tioneer, and the information was filed for the purpose of
recovering a penalty of 5001. which he had forfeited by
selling goods which he had not returned to the Excise-
officer of the district, and on which he had not paid the
duty. He would give evidence of six sales which took
place in the year 1830, where a number of articles were
sold which were not in the catalogues, or returned in his
sheets afterwards.

VV
The Permit-writer, at Ulverston, produced the notices
of the six sales, and the catalogues rendered to him by
the defendant. He attended some of those sales, and saw
sold a chest of drawers and abed, which were not returned
as sold in the defendant's sheets as returns of sales upon
which the duty was charged:
Mrs. Alderson deposed to having attended all the sales,
and enumerated a number of articles which she saw sold,
and the pr ices at which they were sold. She did nut take
any note of the articles or prices, but carried them in her
memory until she went borne, when her husband put them
down on a paper from which she now read them.
The witness was cross-examined by the defendant, and
caused great laughter in the Court. He attempted to show
that her husband and she had a conversation, in which he
said they expected the defendant would this time be fined
1001. She said, " Law, Mr. Clarke, bow could we say
lany such thing, when we knew so well you were not
worth a farthing."—" Thanks to you and your wortby
husband ; for while I have a drop of blood left you seem
determined to suck me."
John Alderson, an excise officer, was then called to
prove the same facts ; after which the Jury returned a
verdict for the Crown.