The Sun.
London, England, 1845-04-10 00:00:00

RAILWAY SHARES.

Verna's, R.B.••• •• 620 .. 620 .. GOO .. 6,0
L.B•••••••••••• 360 . 3',0 .. 375 .. 375
Rouen ....1127 50. . 1127 50 ..1117 50 —lll7 50

Rouen to flavre.• ..... 960 .• b 62 50 -• 960 .. 962 50
Orleans ..... , 1262 50 —1263 75 .. 1250 .. 1250
Strasburg to Bale•••..••••• 332 50 • • 323 75 .. 317 50 .. 317 50
Avlamon to Marseillea• • •...1:50 . •1100 .•1070 • 1070
Bordeaux to Testa • • •• .... 210 • • 215 .. 210 210

RAILWAYS FOR THE ACCOUNT
St. Germain ..... ..........1185 ..1185 ..1175 ..1175
Versailles, ..... 620 .. 620 .. 5?2 50 .. 592 50
L. 8.. •••••••••• 380 •• 380 .. 370 .. 370
Rouen•..•- •• •• ..........1139 ..1130 —lll5 ..1117 50

- - - - - - -
Rouen to Havre . • •• 965 • 965 • 950 ..950
Orleans... .... :265 ..1267 50 ..1247 50 ..1247 50

Strasburg to Bale • • • • • • • . • • 325 .. 325 .. 316 25 • • 317 50
Avignon to Marseilles •• • 1110 ..1110 1075 ..1075

THIS DAY'S NEWS.

CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
The Lord Chancellor sat at Lincoln's Inn Hall to-day.
LANGLEY V. FISHER.

The LORD CHANCELLOR gave judgment to-day in this
ease, which was argued before hint some time since. The
case came on upon appeal from the decision of the Master of
the Rolls; and the question involved was whether a husband
was bound to answer interrogatories put to him on the part
of the plaintiff, in a suit in which his wife was a defendant.
The husband in this case had demurred to the interrogato-
ries on the ground that he was not bound to:answer them.
On the case coming on before the Master of the Rolls, his
Lordship allowed the demurrer, and from that judgment the
present appeal was brought. The Lord Chancellor, after
going at some length through the facts of the case, affirmed
the judgment of the Court below.
The Court was occupied the remainder of the morning with
lunatic petitions.

ROLLS COURT.-(THIS DAY.)
The Master of the Rolls, after disposing of the cases "In
re Pender" and " In re Bracey," proceeded to hear the fur-
ther arguments in the part-heard case of ".Johnson v.
North," which occupied his Lordship the remainder of the
morning.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
(Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.)
WILLIAMS v. WILLIAMS.—JUDGMENT.
His HONOUR gave judgment to-day in this case, which
was argued before him some time since, when we gave a de-
tailed account of the facts. Our readers will recollect that
the plaintiff and defendant are two brothers, who carried on
the business of distillers in Worcester, but having quarrelled
with respect to the effect of certain arrangements they had
entered into for the purpose of carrying on the concern,
which had been established for a century, the present bill
was filed for the purpose of dissolving the partnership, and
for taking the accounts between the parties. His Honour
this morning went at considerable length into the facts of the
case, and gave judgment, decreeing according to the prayer
of the plaintiff's bill, with costs up to the hearing.
(Before Vice-Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE.)
His HONOUR took causes to-day, and having disposed of all
on his paper, rose before eleven o'clock.
( Before Vice-Chancellor WIGRAM.)
SHORT V. EMPRINGTON.
The Court was occupied the whole morning with the fur-
ther arguments in this part-heard case, which came before
his Honour upon demurrer.

CRIMINAL COURT.-('PHIS DAY.)
OLD COUIZT.

(Before Mr. Commissioner BuiLcoi.)
FELONY.—Daniel Washbrook and James Gurney were in-
dicted for having stolen a handkerchief from the pocket of
Edward Evans.

Mr. Hurry defended Washbrook.
The prisoners were found Guilty and sentenced to imprison-
ment for two calendar months.
(Before Mr. Justice COLERIDGE and Mr. Justice COLTMAN.)
James Herbert, aged 24, a' shoemaker, was indicted for
feloniously cutting and wounding William Girling, with
intent to murder

The prisoner had lodged with the prosecutor, and owed
him some rent. On Thursday, the 27th of March, prisoner
came home about two o'clock in the afternoon, and, upon
being pressed for the payment of his rent, struck the prose-
cutor two violent blows on the head with a hammer, which
rendered him insensible for sonic time. _ _

A surgeon proved that the wounds
_inflicted were of a
dangerous nature.
The prisoner urged, in his defence, that, exasperated by the
threat of the prosecutor to seize his furniture for rent, he
took up the hammer merely intending to hit him in the arm,
but that it slipped in his hands and do missed his aim.
Mr. Justice COLERIDGE summed up, and the jury found the
prisoner Guilty.
Sentence—twelve months' imprisonment in the House of
Correction, with hard labour.

John Wells, aged 25, a painter, was indicted for unlawfully
obtaiuing, by means of false pretences, 31. 15s. from James
Smith, 3/. ss. 6d. from Charles Hodder, 3/..155. from George
James, and 2/. ss. from Jonathan Lucas, and attempting to
obtain 4/. 15s. from Lucretia Baldock, with intent to cheat
them thereof.
Mr. Duane defended the prisoner.
- - - - -

From the evidence on one of these charges, it would appear
that the prisoner had presented an order on the prosecutor,
Hodder, purporting to be signed by one Higginbottom, which
he got cashed, and for which the prisoner gave a receipt.
Mr. DOANE urged in defence, that the prisoner had always
been a man of weak intellect, and one who would be very
likely to be Made use of as a tool in the hands of others.
The jury found him Not guilty.
He was then tried upon the other charges in the indictment•