The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-15 00:00:00

Last
Price,

,• 119 60
,• 82 85
.3160
-1095
.5030
• 660

• 1071
• 61 75

• 98 65

• 923
.• 400
• 285
.1001 25
• 775
.1007 50
. 272 50
• 821 25

RAILWAYS FOR THE ACCOUNT, rov 16.
Versailles, R. 8.. ••••••• •• • • 400 400 .. 400
L.B 287 50 •• 285 •• 282 50
Rouen •• • • • .....1000 ..1003 75 ..1000
Rouen to Havre-- .• 772 50 •• 773 75 •• 772 50
Orleans
Strasburg to 270 .. 272 50 .. 270
Avignon to Marseilles-- 822 5G 827 50 .. 820

400
285
1000
773 75
1006 25
272 50
822 50

THIS DAY'S NEWS.

CHANCERY.—(THIS DAY.) '—
The Lord Chancellor heard cause petitions, lunatic
petitions, and appeals to-day.
IN THE CASE OF THE FEVERSHAM CHARITIES.
This case came before the Court upon petition,
praying the confirmation of the Master's report, ap-
pointing two new trustees to certain extensive charities
in Feversham. A reference was directed to the Master
to appoint-new trustees in the room of two gentlemen
who had left the parish, one now residing at Dover, and
the other at Finsbury. The Master appointed two
gentlemen, and the object of the present application was
to confirm that report.
His LORDSHIP ordered the report to be confirmed.
The Court then disposed of the several lunatic peti-
tions on the paper, and afterwards proceeded with the
part-heard appeal of Livesey v. Livesey, which occupied
the Court the whole day.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
The Vice-Chancellor of England was occupied the
whole morning with unopposed petitions and short causes.

(Before Sir J. WIGRAM.)
LUND V. BLANSHARD AND OTHERS.

His HoNowt gave his decision this morning 03 t'.7o
demurrers, put in to the plaintiff's amended bill by the
defendants, who are members of the Yorkshire Agricul-
tural and Commercial Banking Company, and the Lon-
don and Westminster Bank. The main arguments in
the case had been heard, but the Court required a
further hearing on the only two points raised by the
demurrers' misjoinder and multifariousness; and Mr. K.
Parker and Mr. Hetherington have argued on the part
of the plaintiffs against the demurrers, on the grounds
above stated. The plaintiffs are shareholders in the
Yorkshire Banking Company, the defendants were con-
nected
with the management and direction, and the Lon-
don and Westminster Bank had been appointed the
London agents of the Company.
His HONOUR overruled both demurrers.
Sir K. Bruce did not sit to-day, his Court being en-
gaged for the business usually transacted in the Ses-
sions-house.

QUEEN'S BENCII.—(TIIIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
HOWARD V. GossETT.
This was an action brought by Mr. Howard, an
attorney, of Norfolk-street, in the Strand, to recover
damages from Sir William Gossett, the Sergeant-at-
Arms to the House of Commons, for an alleged unlawful
arrest and false imprisonment. The defendant admitted
all the facts laid in the declaration, but pleaded that he
was justified in what he had done, by a warrant of the
House of Commons, for the arrest and imprisonment of
the plaintiff. To this the plaintiff demurred, and the
demurrer came on for argument this morning. The
case arose out of the proceedings in the well-known case
of Stockdale v. Hansard. The plaintiff, as attorney for
Stockdale, had conducted the proceedings in that case,
and after Stockdale had been arrested and imprisoned
for contempt of the House of Commons, the plaintiff,
his attorney, was also summoned to the bar of the House,
and shortly afterwards arrested and imprisoned by order
of the House, and it was to recover compensation for
this arrest and imprisonment that he had brought this
action.

Mr. KELLY, in support of the demurrer, contended
,hat the warrant set forth in the pleadings could not
ustify the arrest and detention of the plaintiff, inasmuch
as it set forth no cause of offence whatever, but simply
cause of imprisonment, or naming any
directed the arrest and detention of the'plaintiff without
specifying any
time at which such imprisonment should cease. Lord
Coke had laid it down in his Institutes, that every mitti-
mus must show good cause of arrest, in order that the
prisoner might obtain his relief by habeas corpus if the
cause set forth should be wrong. If this warrant, which
specified no offence, should be held to be a good warrant,
and if, on an application for habeas corpus, their Lord-
ships were to remand upon such a warrant, it would im-
port that the House of Commons might arrest any sub-
ject of the realm without any offence or any charge,
which would be a violation of Magna Charta and
of the Petition of night, in both of which it
was laid down that no freeman should be imprisoned
or detained without cause shown, whereby he is
imprisoned and detained. It was true that in the bad
times of the James's and the Charles's, when the Courts
of Justice were themselves the greatest violators of the
law, warrants were issued for the apprehension of per-
sons without specifying the cause of offence ; but Sir
Edward Coke, before those times, had expressly laid
down the law to the contrary ; and since the days of
James 11., the practice had been universally condemned,
and, in good times, the law, as laid down by Lord Coke,
had always been considered as the current law. The
warrant was also bad, for want of a lawful conclusion.
It simply ordered the arrest of the plaintiff without
stating where he was to be brought, where he was to be
imprisoned, what time he was to be imprisoned, or how
he was to be delivered. There was no indication of his
offence, neither was it stated what he was to do to purge
himself of his offence. This was directly contrary to the
iaw as laid down by Lord Coke, who laid it down, that
every warrant ought to show a lawful cause of imprison-
ment, and ought to have a lawful conclusion, such as,
that the prisoner should be 'detained until delivered by
due course of law. The defendant was not told by the
warrant to bring the plaintiff before the House,
but he was to take him into custody, and to
keep him in custody ; it would appear until
they should choose to order what should be done
with him. Now this was contrary to Magna Charta,
and the warrant was therefore void. He now came to
what was the practice in regard to contempts, and he
believed it would be admitted that it was only for con-
tempt that the House of Commons possessed the power
of imprisonment. Now the practice of all tribunals
having the power of attainting for contempt, was to call
upon the party accused to answer ; if he refused, or
gave no snfficient answer, he was adjudged guilty of con
tempt, and the warrant authorising his imprisonment in
variably set forth that he was committed for contempt
Here it was not stated that he was committed for con.

--
tempt, and he would ask on what principle the House
of Commons was to depart from a practice which was
binding on all other tribunals committing for con-
upon
presumethe
thatfac e
otefmpt.
twarrant,N o
andcontempt t
the
we h teeuv
re
tr
the committal was for contempt. If the Court were to
c oa up rde arn
oetd
do so the liberty of every subject would be at the mercy
of the House of Commons. He submitted that no au-
thority could be found in which any warrant had been
held lawful, which did not sat forth theoffence for which
the party was to be arrested. With regard to the cases
of imprisonment for contempt, he would merely refer
the Court to the arguments of Sir J. Campbell in the
case of Stockdale and Hansard, where everyone of these
cases had bean collected. He did not deny the right of
the House of Commons to imprison for contempt, but
ho did contend that they had no right to imprison for any
other cause, or for no cause at all, or by virtue of a war-
rant showing no cause. The next question was, sup-
posing the warrant to be bad could the defendant fall
back upon the averments in the plea in aid of the war-
rant. He apprehended the defendant could not. Having
set forth the warrant as his justification for the arrest,
he could not depart from it, and if that warrant were
bad he could not show aliunde that there was good cause
to justify the arrest. If a Sheriff's officer arrested a
man upon a bad writ of capias it would be no justifica-
tion of that arrest to show that the bad writ was founded
upon agood judgment.

Mr. Justice COLERIDCE—In an action against a magi-
strate for false imprisonment, if the warrant is bad, but
he sets forth that the conviction is good, would not that
be sufficient, supposing he only pleaded the general issue?

of our credit on the banks of
,the Bosphorus has pro-
cured for M. DE BOURQUENEY a seat at; the Luxem-
bourg ?"

If we are to believe the: following 'account in the
Reforme, the state of the cotton manufactures in
Normandy is most deplorable, and forms a sad con-
trast to the activity which prevails, in our manufac-
turing districts :
"Amongst the disastrous facts which demonstrate to
what a state of distress both masters and operatives are
reduced, the state of the Rouen manufactures gives a
melancholy contradiction to the shameless collectors of
statistics of our over-increasing prosperity. At this
moment the master cotton-spinners of that city, to the
number of 300 or 400, have agreed to shorten the period
of labour of their operatives by one-third, until the end
of the month of March next—that is to say, that during
five months the week, as far as regards 65,000 operatives,
shall consist of four days, instead of seven. Let us
hear the excuse of these masters. They assert that the
foreign markets are closed against them. Their stores
are overstocked, notwithstanding the considerable con-
sumption in Algeria. The names are mentioned of some
houses which have from one to two millions'-worth of
manufactured cotton on hand. In order to avoid abso-
lute ruin to themselves, and likewise the necessity for
dismissing their operatives, the manufacturers have but
one resource—the reduction of one-third of the hours of
labour. But have they diminished their luxuries ?
Have they diminished one-third of their unnecessary ex-
penses ? Let the operatives of Rouen give to a petition
for inquiry the support of their numbers and of their
sufferings. Let the masters themselves protest against
our system of political economy, of which they avoid the
consequences by throwing them on the operatives."
The French Three per Cents, continued very firm
and closed on Wednesday at 82f. 75c.
THE BOURSE—WEDNESDAY, Nov. 13.
First Highest Lowest
Price. Price. Price.
French Five per emits .. 119 45 .. 119 65 .. 119 50
Three per Cents..... 82 90 82 90 .. 82 80
Bank of France • 3145 —3160 ..3145
Laffltte Bank, I,ooof. Shareslo9s .•1095 ..1095
5,000 f. Sharesso3o ••5030 —5030
Belgian Bank.... •••• • • 660 .. 660 • • 660
Belgian Fives, 1840 •••• • • • 103/ • • 1041 • • 1031
1842 ..••.• 1071 .. 107/ •• 1071
Two-and-a-Half 61 75 61 75 .. 61 75
Dutch Two and-a-Half .•••• 621 .. 621 .. 621
Spanish Threes • • .• •• •• 361 .. 361 .. 36/
Active ••.••• • • •• 321 .• 33 .. 321
Passive •••••• 61 .. 61 .. 61
Portuguese Five per Cents.. b 5 .. 55 .. 55
Neapolitan
Roman, ex dIV •• •. 1031 .. 1031 .. 1031
RAILWAY SHARES.
St. Germain •••••••• •• • 925 .. 925 • . 925
Versailles, 400 .. 400 .. 400
L. 8.......•••• •• 283 75 .• 285 .. 283 75
Rouen, ex •• •• —lOOO . 1001 25 ..1000
Rouen to Havre....
Orleans .•.
Strasbarg to Bale ... 270 .. 273 75 .. 270
Avignon to Marseilles-- 825 • 825 .. 820