The Sun.
London, England, 1850-01-23 00:00:00

gANCLIESTER, JAN. 22.

STOCK ErniAxen.—The market opened steadily this
morning, but declined somewhat in the afternoon. There
has been a fair business done. The transactions were as
follow :—Caledonian, Preference, B—Eastern Counties, 71,4—
Great Northern (B.), guaranteed 6 per cent. 3% dis—Lan-
cashire and Yorkshire, 59—Ditto (Manchester, Bolton, and
Bury), 1001, 41 dis.—London, Brighton, and South Coast,
8,114 c.—London and North-Western, 1814—Ditto, New
Quarters, 21A p. Ditto, Manchester and Birmingham,
Quarters (C), 1 p.—Manchester. Sheffield, and Lincoln-
shire Quarters (No. 1),. 9 Ditto, Preference, 8 7-16—Ditto
( Sheffield and Lincolnshire), 4%—Ditto (Manchester and
Lincoln Union), 725. dis.—North Staffordshire, 9 13-16
North Union, 233—South Staffordshire, 3--4 dis. South-
Eastern and Doter (No. 4), Scrip, 6 i 4.

BIRMINGHAM, JAN. 22.
STOCX EXCHANGE.—There was little business done to.
(lay, and prices were much the same as last quotations.

YORK, JAN. 21.
&root EXCHANGE.—The transactions to-day were as
follow : Great Northern, N—Lancashire and Yorkshire,
55%—S1.effield, Potherham, and Goole, N. Div., guaranteed
Norths per cent., 161. Is. 3d—York .and Midland 18q4
Ditto, Preference, 5%.

STATE OF TRADE:—MANCUESTER, TUESDAY.—
By the Cambria, Boston mail steamer, c f the 9th inst.,
we have this morning advices from New York to the Bth
inst. These reply to letters hence on the 15th ult.,
which showed a decline in the Liverpool cotton market
for the week Preceding of nearly a id. per pound, and a
generally dull and unsett!ei stats of business here.
Notwithstanding thie, these advices show a further
rah-once in the New York Cotton-market of m arty one
cent. per pound, with a still upWard market. This has
arisen from further redaced estimates of the crop, which
it is now stated, on good authority, will not exceed
9,100,00 ladles; some go much lower.- We- have, in
cunsequence, much excitement in the Liverpool market
to-day, and prices have consider ably advanced. Here
business has been almost suspended tc-:'ay in conse-
(vv...nee of these advices, as producers are Tate unable
to fix rates, or a'k such as they do not, fir the present,
t lexst, expect to realise. Meanwhile the orders in the
hands cf buyers are to a large amount, and stocks in
the hands el the trade were seldom ever before so low.
C arse numbers of yarn and the heavier cloths are
13.et.:r. The former, particularly, have considerably
advanced, and aro very scarce.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
ROLLS COURT, Jan. 22.
lIODGSON V. EARL POWIS.
This cause, which was a bill filed by the plaintiff
to restrain the directors of the Shropshire Union
Canal and Railway Company from making any fur-
ther calls, except for the purpose of constructing all
the lines authorised by the Acts cf Parliament under
which the company acted, now came on upon de-
murrer. It appeared that three different lines were
originally projected by this company—the Chester
and Wolverhampton, the Crewe and Alvanley, and
the Shrewsbury and Stafford—which were ultimately
united with the Ellesmere Canal Company. This
company was authorised to construct these three lines,
w hen they entered into negotiations with the London and
North. Western Beltway Company, which was to take
upon itse:f the debts of the Ellesmere Canal Company,
upon condition that the profits of the line should be
equally divided between the two companies. Con
sequent upon this arrangement, and, as it was
alleged by the directors, from the difficulty
of raising the necessary funds, they determined to
Abandon two of the three lines, which were amalga-
mated in the Shropshire Union Canal and Railway
Company, and had an advertisement inserted in the
Times newspaper, of September 13, 1849, intimating
their intention to apply to Parliament for authority
to abandon these lines, and to confine themselves to
the line from Shrewsbury to Stafford. The capital
required for the construction of the three lines was
2,300,0001., and but 800,000/. fir the construction of
the line from Shrewsbury to Stafford; of this sum
7,065/. had been received, when there was a balance
in hand of 1,009/. IC. lcl. In this state of facts the
directors made new calls upon the shares of the
company, which were resisted by the plaintiff in the
cause, on the ground that they were illegal, as the
directors could not appropriate the funds of the company
other wise than as provided by the Act of Incorpora-
tion, and that the abandonment of the two lines
brought there within the scope of the doctrine laid
down upon this point, and decided in the case of
Cohen v. Wilkinson. It was contended on the other
side, that the directors had not made these calls to ap-
propriate them otherwise than they were authorised
by the. Act of Incorporation, and would not divert the
to ode from their original destination without the fur-
ther sanction of the Legislature, which the notice of
September, 1849, clearly indicated.
Messrs. Turner and Wilcox were heard in support
of the demurrer, Mr. B. Palmer, Mr. Mathis, and
Mr. NVellshy4n support of the bill, and Mr. Turner
having replied,
Lord LANGDALE said, that the general principle laid
down in Cohen v. Wilkinson, decided that the di
rectors could nut legally apply the funds in the con-
struction of a part of the line, and to neglect the con-
struction cf the whole. 111 did not think that the
case of Cohen v. Wilkinson was precisely anulagous,
es here there was only an intention to abandon a part of
the line with the sanction of Parliament. The bill
wants a material allegatier, thet the directors in-
tended to mi:,apply the funds, which induces me, in
allowing the demurrer, to give them time to amend.
r The bill does not contain sufficient allegation to pre-
vent the demurrer being allowed, but the parties must
have leave to amend.
The u'ual order was directed to be made out-, in
I conformity with his Lordship's decision.

VI CE CHANCELLOR'S COURT, Jun. 22.
(Before Sir J. WIGRAM.)

N RE LONDON AND PORTSMOUTH DIRECT RAILWAY

COMPANY.

This was a petition of Mr. Guldsmid, an allottee
certain shares, on which 103. deposit had been paid in
the above company, praying for its dissolution in the
usual form, under the Joint Stock Companies Wind.
ing-up Act. The dissolution was opposed by the ma-
nagers ( f the company, on the ground that the olject
of the Winding-up Act was to arrange the affairs of
sunk companies, as between the partners themsever,
but that, in this instance, the real object was to let in
a pecuniary claim made by Mr. Drake, the engineer
of the company.
His HoNoutt said that he had nothing to do with
any presumed collateral object. He had merely to
consider whether this was a case to which the Act
applied, and• as there was a clear proof of debt he
should comply with the prayer of the petition, and
make the order for winding up the affairs of the com•
pany.

BAIL COURT, Jan. 22.
Sittings in Banco, before Mr. Justice WionTm

TIIE QUEEN V. RIX AND SENIOR.
In this case there were nine indictments for em-
bezzlement and two for conspiracy.
Mr. PALMER now moved that the prisoners should
be brought up to plead. From the fact of the offences
having been committed at various timer, they had to
be described in several indictments.

The- prisoners, two respectable looking young men,
were then brought into court.
The Crown officer of the court then read over the
indictment!, nine of which charged the prisoners
with stealing and embezzling certain large sums of
money at various times, from their employers, at Diss,
in the county of Norfolk. Two other indictments
charged the prisoners with having conspired to obtain
thee moi eys.
The prisoners pleaded not guilty. They were
then inrormed that her Majesty's coroner and attor-
ney joined issue, and that they would be tried at the
next assizes f)r the county of Norfolk.
Mr. Couca (who appeared on the part of Rix)
moved that particulars of the charges, to be made in
writing, should be supplied by the prosecutors.
Mr. VALMER objected to this, from the difficulty
there would be in giving the particulars. The par-
ticulars would be that the prisoners had, at certain
times, made false entries. The sum taken was
10,0001
It was subsequently determined that particulars of
the conspiracy should be supplied, and another ap-
plication should be made with regard to the felony
on affidavits. The prisoners were then returned to
the custody of the gaoler of Norfolk.