The Sun.
London, England, 1861-11-04 00:00:00

STATEMENT OF TALLOW SHIPPING AT ET. PETERSBURG.
Tallow despathed from Cronstadt 1861. 1860. 1859.
from Oct. 9, O. S. (estimated at 25 Casks. Casks. Casks
poods to the cask) 51,399 116,298 73,863
In ships loading and lighters 15,628 5,117 101,83

Total loaded offfrom St. Petersburg,
Oot. 11, O.S 6!,C27 121,415 81,046
Do. after this date

Total at the close of the navigation

127,547 88,022

London
Liverpool 4,065 313
Bristol
Other English ports
Ireland 576 1,080 1,227
Scotland
Germany 10,482 6,599 3,810
France

51,399 116,293 73,863

LA TV INTBLLIGENCE—r This Day.)

COURT OF CHANCERY.
(Before the Lord Chancellor.)
2A ULEY V. TURNBULL.
This is an appeal from a decision of Vice-Chancellor Sir
John Stuart.

Mr. Malins, Q.C., was heard for the appellant.
This is a suit for specific performance of a building con-
tract. The defendant pleaded that the contract was void
by fraud, unfair dealing, and abuse of powers therein con-
tained.

The case is reported in the " Jurist," new series,
p. 192.
The Vice-Chanceller ordered £2,780 to be paid to the
defendant in respect of houses already built, and directed
inquiries as to extra work performed and money ordered to
be paid by the architect in the course of building houses on
the Gartan-road. The defendant objected, and appealed on
the ground that the architect should have ordered payment
as the work was completed.

Mr. Matins, Q.C., in support of his argument, cited the
case of the Liverpool Water Works (" De Gex and Jones'
Reports," p. 324).
His Lordship mentioned the cases of the Taff Vale Rail-
way Company and the Great Western—" Kemp and Roe"
(" Chancery Reports," p. 358)—as cases in point, showing
the powers exercised by architects and engineers in such
contracts.

Mr. Craig, Q.C., followed on the same side, and read the
evidence produced, to show that the whole works were
completed, and also the extra works, at the time the de-
fendants relinquished possession.

The case is not concluded.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Sir William Page Wood.)

PETITION BY ORDER-IN RE ENGLISH AND IRISH CHURCH

AND UNIVERSITY ASSURANCE SOCIETY.

His Honour said,—l have read the papers during the
vacation.

This is a common order.
His Honour ordered costs to be paid to parties properly
appearing in the suit. No costs to voluntaries.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

(Before Justices Wightman, Crompton, and Blackburn.)
WHITMORE AND OTHERS, ASSIGNEES Or J. E. COLRIDGE

V. CLARIDGE.

Mr. Huddlestone applied on the part of the defendants
pursuant to leave given to move that the verdict given, when
the case was heard at the assizes, for the plaintiffs' for
£1,873, be entered for defendant. The action was brought
to try the validity of a bill of sale, given by the bankrupt
on his brother, a farmer in Worcester. The bankrupt fell into
difficulties in 1859, and applied to Messrs. Weaver to raise
money to:pay out two executions ; but the money not being
forthcoming, the bankrupt applied to his brother, the defen-
dant, who through his banker paid out the execution, and
made some additional advances, taking as security two bills
of sale of the whole of the personal property of the bank-
rupt on the two farms. It was proved at the trial that the
money was actually paid, and the learned judge left the
jury to draw their own inference.
The Court granted a rule to show cause.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
(Before the Lord Chief Baron, and Barons Bramwell,
Channell, and Wilde.)
THE REV. MR. HATCH V. LEWIS.

Mr. Sergt. Ballantine this morning showed cause against
the rule obtained by Mr. Sergeant Shee, on the last day of
Trinity Term, on the part of the plaintiff, calling upon the
defendant to Rhnw esumn why thn on;.,+;ff
judgment for his full costs under the 15th and 16th Vict.,
cap. 64, the action being a fit and proper one to be tried in
a superior court, notwithstanding the verdict for thoplaintiff
was under £2O, viz., 40s. It will be recollected that Mr.
Hatch had been convicted of an indecent assault upon two
children named Plummer, but on one of the children being
indicted for perjury a verdict of guilty was returned, and
the result was that Mr. Hatch received a pardon, and the
elder child was sentenced to a short term of imprisonment.
Mr. Hatch then brought an action against the Messrs.
Lewis, solicitors, of Ely-place, for heavy damages,
for alleged negligence on the first trial. The case
was tried in this court in May last, and instead of
estimating the damages at L 5,000, which was the sum set
down by Mr. Hatch, the jury returned a verdict for the
plaintiff for 40s. Application was then made to the Lord
Chief Baron who tried the cause to certify that it was a pro-
per one to be tried in a superior court in order to enable the
plaintiff to get his costs, but the judge refused. The learned
counsel contended that the rule which had been obtained by
the plaintiff, was practically an appeal against the refusal
of the Lord Chief Baron to grant his certificate, and that the
action brought was altogether an experimental one for the
purpose of getting money from gentlemen who had served
him well.

Mr. Lush followed on the same side, and was addressing
the Court when we went to press.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—(This Day.)

MARLBOROUGH-STREET.

SINGULAR CASE OF ROBBERY.—Charles Antey, a young
man in the employ of Mrs. Peak°, coachbuilder, of Lisle-
street, Leicester-square, was charged before Mr. Beadon
with stealing the half of a £5 note and 10s., the property
of Mr. Charles Sanders, of Stockwell-park-crescent, coach-
builder, and who also occupies part of Mrs. Peake's pre-
mises.

Mr. Sanders said—On the 18th of October I missed the
half of a £5 note from a letter, the letter having been placed
in the loft where the prisoner was at work. I received an
anonymous letter last week as follows :

" Sir,—l have got the half of a£s note, and you shall
have it on payment of 605., which I consider fair, as it will
square accounts a little. I could get £4 for it from the
Jews, as I have inquired ; so I have given you the chance
of getting a£s note for £2 10a. You can put the money in
a place chalk-marked on the right side of the stairs, and I
will put your half-note there."
Mr. Sanders—ln consequence of this notice I, in com-
pany with Sergeant Joy, 9 C, marked 10s. in silver, tied it
up in a piece of paper, and placed it in the recess on the
staircase, in accordance with the anonymous letter. I went
on Saturday and examined the place, and the packet
was gone. I afterwards saw Sergeant Joy search the
prisoner and find some of the marked money on him. The
prisoner said he hoped I would not press the charge, and
that he had done it because he wanted money.

Sergeant Joy, 9C, said—l was called in on Saturday
afternoon to Mrs. Parkes in Lisle-street, and stopped the
prisoner. I asked him what he had about him, and he re-
plied " Nothing," but on my telling him that I must
search him, he pulled out three of the marked shillings
which I had marked on the previous night. I then asked
where the rest of the money was, and the prisoner went up
into the loft and pulled off his boots and stockings and in
the latter were two marked half-crowns and a florin. Pri-
soner admitted he wrote the anonymous letter, and said it
was to get 60 shillings from Mr. Sanders as he was badl
off.

Mr. Beadon—Then that admits the possession of the
half-note.

Mr. Sanders—The half note was sent by a gentleman
at Bideford, Devon, and the letter from which it was taken
also contained two halves of £lO notes sent by the Rev. Mr.
Baines.
The prisoner was committed for trial.