The Sun.
London, England, 1850-04-23 00:00:00

ccLo:..rzar..

SUGAR,—The rnarlietTuriiiiTicPlantation continues
without material alteration; sales about 380 hhds; Mau-
ritius, 6,000 bags were nearly all disposed of on rather
easier terms ; Bengal, 5,970 bags were about two-thirds
sold, at a reduction of 6d per cwt. Privately, 500 boxes
yellow llavannah sold at 19s. 6d., and a floating cargo of
brown Bahia, at about 18s. The quantity of British Plant-
ation landed last week at the East and West India
Docks was 1,874 hhds, 182 tierces, 100 barrels; there
were taken for home consumption 1,041 hhds, 170 tierct s,
209 barrels. The stock in the same. places is 6,247 hhds,
1,229 tierces 1,395 barrels.

COFFEE.—"T be market is exceedingly heavy. Pri-
vately about 5,000 bags Native Ceylon have changed
hands at 43s per cwt.
CCCO9.-146 bags Trinidad at auction were with-
drawn at nominal prices.
Rum —The quantity lsnded laSt week at the East and
West India Docks was 573 puns 43 tilach; there was
taken for home consumption 259 paw, and expried 57
puns 77 1-ads. The stock in the same places is 14,237
puns, 1,806 hhds.

. -
11IcE.-4,260 bags Bengal mostly sold at steady rates,
from 8s 6d to lOs fur low mid broken to good white.
SALTPETRE.-2,580 bags Bengal were about half sold
at 25s to 25s 6d for 12,1 to 5 per cent. refraction, being
fully 6cl lower.

SPICES —lOO Robin's Black Per:per sold steadily at
31 to 3itd for fair Estein; 100 cases Cassia Lignea
realised 73s to 78s, being again lower.
TALLOW.—P.Y.C. is 37s per e%t
.on the spot, and
Town 38s.

TEA.—The market is quiet, with fair deliveries.

ROLLS' COUitT.-(THIS DAY.)
The Master of the Rolls was occupied the whole
morning with petitions possessing not the slightest pub-
lic interest.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR Of ENGLAND.)
THE KING OF TUE TWO SICILIES V. WILCOX.

This case came before his Honour this morning for
argument, upon a demurrer put in by the defendants,
the Peninsular and Oriental Steam-packet Company,
to the bill filed by the royal plaintiff, the King of the
Two Sicilies. Our readers will doubtless recollect that
the ease has been before his Honour in various shapes,
first for an injunction to restrain the steam-packet com-
pany from parting with or delivering up a steam-ship
called the Bombay to Prince Granateili and Signor
Scailia, who, it was alleged, were agents sent to this
country in 1848 by the usurping Government of
Sicily, upon the ground that the vessel bad been pur-
chased with moneys taken out of the public treasury,
and therefore the property of the plaintiff, who regained
hie sovereign power in April, 1849. The injunction
was granted, but subsequently dissolved as against the
eteazie:paeket company,, as it appeared that a few days
before the filing of the bill they had parted with all their
interest by registering the ship in the Lames of other
parties. Tie case wee then argued upon a demurrer to
the plaintiff's bill, upon which demurrer it was contended
that the plaintiff had admitted a Government de facto
during his disponsesion, but &aimed as King de jure,
which involved a question of Sicilian law, of which there
was no averment; that the pleintifre right to sue was
doubtful; and that the members of the rebellious Go-
vernment were necessary parties, and the treatises by
Puffendorf and Vat'el on international law were referred
to, besides numerous cases. Iu support of the bill it
wee argued, that the rebellious Government being stated
throughout as "unlawful," was a sufficient averment
that it was contrary to the Sicilian law; that the plaintiff
had a right to sue; that the public money could be fol-
lowed as belonging to the plaintiff as King, and that the
rebellious Government were not necessary parties to the,
bill. Upon that demurrer his Honour gave judg-
ment in February last, observing that there
was no case on the record of belligerent
parties, but merely of a party who, being an absolute
Sovereign, part of his sunjects were in rebellion against
him, and took that opportunity to possess themselves of
some part of the royal property belonging to the plain-
tiff se king. He succeeded in putting down the rebellion,
and the rebellious parties having made use of their ab-
solute power over the royal funds, took the opportunity,
by means of bills, to send those royal funds to this
country, and his opinion was that they did not thereby
acquire any right to such property as against their
Sovereign. It appeared to his honour an extraordinary
thing, after the principle which had been laid down in
the cases of "the Nabob of the Carnatic" and " the
King of Spain," that any difficulty should have been
raised. it appeared upon those cases to be laid down
plainly, that an independent Sovereign of a state was
paonsdsessrieoc9o v e r
of thatp e rtrye
bwe
lhliioe
uhs hasdub
jbecetesn.
competent in this country to sue for his per6onal
his
giks ieltnHonour's opinis'on, therefore, was, that the demurrer
His
must be overruled, with costa Since then another de-
murrer had been filed to the plaintiff's bill, on the
ground that as the bill sought a discovery of the whole
transaction, and as that discovery, if given, might ex-
pose the defendants to a criminal prosecution, they
were not bound to answer any matter that subjeceel
them to any such rebuke.
Mr. STUART opened tee demurrer this morning, and
the arguments occupied the Court the whole day.
_

(Before the ViCe-Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE.)
Cases of no general interest occupied his Honour the
whole morning.
(Before the Vice- Chancellor WlGRAM.)irdlagi„.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. COOPER.
The further arguments in this part-heard case were
resumed this morning, and occupied his Honour the
whole day. The case came bt-fore the Court upon de-
murrer fur want of equity, want of parties, misjoinder,
and multifariousness The object of the information is
to obtain a declaration that a Mr. M`Rae legally remains
the minister of a Dissenting chapel in New Windsor; an
account of moneys received under a deed of 1833 in
favour of the minister's salary and of the pew rents; the
removal of the present trustees and the appointment of
persons in their place; and an injunction for the pur-
pose of preventing the existing trustees from removing
the present minister of the chapel.
Mr. Wood and Mr. Ellis appear in support of the de-
murrer; the Solicitor-General and Mr. Prior appeared
for the relators, who are the minister and two of the
members of the congregation.

QUEEN'S BENCH.—(THIS DAY.)
(Before Lord Chief Justice CAMPBELL and Justices
PATTESON, WIGHTMAN, and ERLE.)
DOE DEM. EVANS V. WALKER.
Mr. CROWDER said in this case, which was tried be-
fore Mr. Justice Erie at the last assizes for Exeter, and
a verdict found fur the plaintiff, ho had to move for a
rule to show cause why a nonsuit should not be entered.
It was an action of ejectment, in which Evans, the lessor
of the plaintiff, claimel, as being entitled under a will,
to a copyhold tenement in the possession of the de-
fendant Walker. The question was, whether the title of
the lessor of the plaintiff had been established. The will
was put in under the claimant, and it was evidently the
production of a man who had made his own will, and who
was ignorant of the meaning and effect of legal technical
terms. The language of the will was—" I give, devise,
and bequeath unto James Walker, druggist, son of
Josiah and Mary Walker, one close cf land, known by
the fierce of ' Four Acres,' now in the occupation
of Thomas Salter, as tenant to me, but not
to be sold or mortgaged." Under this clause James
Walker came into possession. The will went on to say,
" I give, devise, and hi queath unto Elizabeth Sandars, two
dwelling-bowies which I hold for the life of Wm. Palmer.
I also give, devise, and bequeath unto the said Elizabeth
Sanders part of my household goods and chattels, tes-
tamentary estate and effects, of whatever neme or deno-
mination, except my clock, bedstead, feather bed and
bedding, which I give and bequeath unto Margatet
Horsey ; and the remainder of my household goods,
chattels, testamentary estate, and effects, I give unto
Margaret Horsey and Elizabeth Sandars, share and shaee
alike." Now, it was contended that this was a residuary
clause, carrying the land of the testator and the close in
question among others. It appeared to him (Mr. Crow-
der) the testator really thought, when he gave the land
to Welker, aed said it was not CO IB sold or mortgagee,
he gave it to him it would descend to him, itt4;
not be sold or mortgaged.

Lord CAMPBELL said the Court was bound to consider
that the testator was aware that he gave only an estate
for life. Be (Lord Campbell) thought it was quite
clear that the remainder in the Four Acres" devised
for life to James Walker passed under the residuary
clause to Elizaheth Sandars. The words in the resi-
duary clause were abundantly sufficient to carry the
realty as well as the personalty.
The rule was refused on that ground.
On another point, as to whether the property was
properly conveyed to the losor of the plaintiff in the
Cop) hold Court,
The COURT said they would take time to consider
their judgment.

EXCHEQUER.--(THIS DAY.)
(Before the LORD CHIEF BARON, and Barons PARKE,

RGLFE and PLATT.)
THE CHARTIST LAND SCHEME.
O'CONNOR V. BRADSHAW.
It will be recollected that this action, which was tried
at the last Nisi Prius sittings in Middlesex, and in which
a verdict was found for the defendant, was brought
against the proprietor of a Nottingham journal for the
publication of a libel, reflecting upon the character of
Mr. Fergus O'Connor, M.P., in connexion with the
" National Land Scheme," of which he was the pro-
jector.

Mr. Sergeant Wineries, who applied yesterday for a
'rule to show cause why a new trial should not be had,
on the ground of misdirection on the part of the Learned
Judge who tried the case, and the rejection cf important
evidence, but who had not concluded when the Court
rose, was again beard this morning. He complained
that his Lordship had left to the jury what was ex-
clusively within his own province. It appeared that in
commenting upon the ph a of justification, his Lordship
told the jury that if they believed the evidence, that
portion of the plea bad been proved which alleged that
the depositors in the bank had no security on the land
purchased by the National Land Company, and ho
then left it for them to say whether the word " dis-
honesty" as applied to the conduct of the plaintiff, had
been sustained, observing that .he could give them no
assistance whatever in the deeisioa cf the question.
He (Mr. Sergeant Wilkins) now submitted that it was
the duty of his Lordship to have stated to the jury
the import of the word dishonesty. His Lordship also
told the jury that the society was illegal, adding, he
had no hesitation in saying so, because it clearly came
within the Lottery 'Acts. But he (Mr.' Sergeant Wil-
kins) contended that it could not come under the provi-
sions of those statutes, because it only resembled a lot-
tery in having a system of balloting, and that balloting
was not for the property itself, but for a priority of
claim. If such a principle were established, nearly
every building society and benefit society in the kingdom
would,beccnie a lottery. The scheme did not hold out
the advantages of a lottery to the subscribers, but pro-
mised to give them, after a certain length of time, the
value of the money which they had deposited. dif•
ference of opinion upon this very point existed amongst
some of the most eminent lawyers, and at present a case
was before the Court of Queen's Bench which was to decide
whether the society was entitled to complete registration
or not. There eras another part of the summing up to
which he wished to refer. His Lordship said that Mr.
O'Connor might have treated a subscriber who wished
for a return of his money with defiance, because be had
invested it in an illegal undertaking, and the law gave
him no protection ' • and further, that all the money de-
posited in the bank would go to the assignees of Mr.
O'Connor in the event of his b'coming a bankrupt. In
the course of the trial documentary evidence was
produced with the view of showing that the plain-
tiff had only acted in the carecity of a trustee,
but that it bad been rejected, and of that re-
jection he had now to complain. The ruling, however,
of the Learned Judge was incorrect in point of law, be-
cause the 79%h of the 6th Gee. IV., c. 16, gave power to the
Lord Chancellor to order the return of all property
which was held by the bankrupt as a trustee, but which
had been seized by his assignees. Such an observation,
therefore, on the part of the judge was greatly calcu-
lated to mislead the jury and to excite a prejudice in
their minds a&ainst Mr. O'Connor. The verdict of the
jury was or.e of rather a singular nature. The first issue
on the of not guilty was found tor the plaintiff, and
the second, on the plea of justification, was found for the de-
fendant, and the verdict was coupled by a statement that
the jury were unanimously of opinion that the personal
honour of Mr. O'Connor remained unimpeached
and untouched. He could only account for
this verdict by his Lordship telling the jury over
and over again that they were to take into account the
boca fides which were proved by Bradshaw, the defen-
dant, but which he submitted ought to have been ex-
cluded from their consideration. On those grounds the
Learned Sergeant contended that he was entitled to ask
for a new trial, but said he would have no objection to
withdraw his application if the defendant would agree to
enter the issue on the plea of justification for the plain-
tiff; and the plaintiff would have no objection to give
him the issue on the plea of not guilty.
The CHIEF BARON observed that if there was any
prospect of some arrangement being made the Court
would grant time to the parties.
Mr. Sergeant \Vicious said his Learned Friend Mr.
Roebuck was unfortunately not instructekin the case.

The CHIEF BARON—Then we will take time to con-
sider our judgment.

BAIL COURT.--,-(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Justice COLERIDGE.)
ENLARGED RULE PAPER.

Mr. Justice COLERIDGE intimated that the Court
would take the en/urged rule psper on Thursday and
two following days.

CRIMINAL INFORMATION.

Mr. I,';Ninx. applied Eo the Court for ieave to file a
criminal iLfurrmation ag:just a.p.ntleman whole name
did not transpire, residing in the West of England. The
party on whose behalf the application na: nae was
connected with the gentlemen by warrior, the applicant
having married the gentleman's sister, and some un-
happy differences hpsing arisen betwect them on the
subject of their pecuniary airairs, the gentleman had
been betrayed into writing the folloWing letter, which
was forwarded to the applicant on the 17th inst.:—
" Sir,—Understsnding that last evening you received
my wife and child at your house, contrary to my wishes,
and she having promised me not to visit you, I
consider your conduct, after what has pre-
viously transpired, very paltry and unlike that
of a gentleman. I therefore send this through
my friend Mr. —, who is fully authorised to act for
me, and I have only to add that unless you give me a
meeting I shall proclaim you to the world as a dastardly
coward."

The applicant construed this letter into a • chal-
lenge to fight a duel with the writer, although he
had never received any intimation that his sister's visits
were forbidden by her husband; and as he was appre-
hensive that a breach of the peace would be committed
unless the violence of his brother-in-law were restrained,
he was anxious to file a criminal information against

Mr. Justice COLEIRIDGE—You may take a rule to
show cruse.

Rule nisi accordingly.

ARCHES COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
(13Efure Sir HERBERT JENNER FUSTY KnigLit.)
THE GORHAM CASE.

Mr. BOWDLER, as proctor for the Rev. C. Gorham,
applied to the Court to grant a certificate in extension cf.
a monition which had been issued out of this court, call-
ing upon the Bishop of Exeter to send in the letters of
institution, in order that the Rev. Charles Gorham might
be inducted to the vicarage of Bamford Speke, in the
diocese of Exeter and county of Devon. On the last
court day an extension of the certificate was prayed, as
the Bishop had not complied with the monition, and bad
not sent in the institution papers. No return had yet
been made, and, as the Bishop was not represented, Mr.
Bowdler prayed that it might stand over till next term.
The JUDGE—You wish the certificate to extend to
next term?

Mr. BOWDLER—YeF, Sir.
The JUDGE—Very well, let it stand over.
LORD FRANKFORT If CONTEMPT.—FRANKFORT V.

FRANKFORT.

Sir J. DODSON, the Queen's Advocate, applied to the
Court to decree Lord Frankfort in contempt for having
disobeyed a monition calling upon him to pay certain
alimony for the use of Lady Frankfort. The Learned
Advocate said that the Court had ordered the sum of
8001. per annum to be paid for the use of Lady Frank-
fort, which sum had not been paid since the Ist of
January, 1849; the consequence of which was that Lady
Frankfort was in the greatest distress. She therefore
prayed that Lord Frankfort might he declared in con-
tempt, and that a decree might issue, directed to the
Lord Chancellor of Ireland, to sequestrate the real pro-
perty and estate of Lord Frankfort.
Dr. HARDING, who appeared for Lord Frankfort,
urged that his Lordship's income had been so greatly
diminished that he could not afford to allow Lady
Frankfort the sum fixed by the Court.
The JUDGE.—The Court had no option but to issue
the contempt for not complying i,itb the decree cf the
Court. Against that decree there was no appeal now,
and, therefore, the Court decreed Lord Frankfort in
contempt, and granted the sequestration as prayed.

BANKRUPTCY.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before Mr. Commissioner FONBLANQUE.)
IN RE ERADING.
This bankrupt was decribed as of the Albert Saloon,
Shepherd and Shepherdess-fields, Islington, and to-day
was appointed for the choice of assignees, which took
place. The performances will be carried on as usual till
the promises are disposed of or until other arrangements
are made.

MARLBRO'-STREET.—(THISDAY.)
CHARGE or EMDEZZLEDIENT.—Vharks Saunders was
brought before Mr. Bingham, for re-examination,
charged with having embezzled various sums of money,
belonging to his employer, Robert Richard Bigrell,
wine-merchant, 7,1, Great Windmill-street.
Mr. Hamilton appeared for the prosecution, and Mr.
Sydney, of Hatton-garden, for the prisoner.
Ihe evidence adduced on the former examination
wont to show that the prosecutor had opened a betting-
office, nnz had engaged the prisoner as clerk, at a sa-
lary of fifteen shillino per week. It was the duty of
the prisoner to pay over to ti7e prosecutor, every
evening, all the money he received during the
day. Complainant discoveiei that the prisoner
had received several sums of money, and t.ai
neither entered them in the book, nor paid
over the amount to hire. The prisoner had re-
ceived 51. from a gentleman named Donald. This
sum was entered in the betting book as 2/. A
Mr. Jones had also two sums of 1/. and 10s.,
neither of which apps aced in the 17 oolr. On di scove=ring
,his prosecutor gave the er itro eos!edy. At the
,tadon-hewe 1.0 was f cache A, snd ho
amount of 63/„w,re; bound upon him. The pt.us,..eutur

now stated that he had discovered several other defale4,
tip at
ine, but at present he was not prepared to go 1.116"-
h
,
into the case. het
Mr. Sidney, on behalf of his client, content:Wl-0,
under a recent Act of Pailiament, the money c-illu?t
be recovered, as a clause in that Act stated that betti-7
was illegal.
Mr. BINGUAN considered it wai a bet upon Ithl,,engti
horst-race, and, therefor?, was recoverable. 11° B"st
now remand the prisoner for a week, but would 90'
bail in two sureties in 804 each for his appearance'