The Sun.
London, England, 1826-07-04 00:00:00

THE FUNDS.

being
CITY, Twe/pe 0' (Rock this Des,.
In the British Securities little or no business of importance has
been tranaacted since the opening this morning ; the first pr
78 ice of
Consols was 781, and it has since only varied a shade,
i; Colombian and Mexican Stock remain without Any logaiai
alteration; for a few moments the market appealed rather hotter,
but subsequently fell to their opening price; Colombian, 274, I ;
Alaskan, 6 per Cent., 404, i•
Three per Cent. Consols for Account, 78, i ; 3 per Cent.
Reduced, 77i, i • 4 per Cent. Scrip, it ~ du. ; India Bonds,
9, 11, pm. ; gxclequer Bills, 7,8, Pm. ;
Bank Stock, 109.
Feacialv FUNDS.-Colombian, 1824, 27, 4; Mexican, 6 per
cent., 40, i; Peruvian, 274; Milian, 30, 2; Russian,77l,
; Greek, 104, 11 ; Danish, 524; Buenos Ayres, 49, 51; Bra.
silian, 48, 50: '
' 5111415.-Anglo Mexican, 40, 35, die.; united Mexasn, 9f,
ai. die. ; Real del
nruiliant 5,4, dis. ; Colombian, 3,5, per Shari'
Monts, 80, die. ; Tlelpuxalnia, 20, 15, die. ;
Two a' Clock.
Consols have bean done as low IS 78, but recovered to 79}, it
and have since then receded to 78k, 4, with a heavy lippearanre.
In the Foreign market Mexican Stock .advanced to 41i, but went
back to 40i, I ; Colombian, 273 i •
,
Consols are 78i., i.

THREE O'CLOCK.

It is asserted in some of the Moniing Piper's, that
a Petition against the return of Colonel MA cQuEEN
for Bedfordshire, has been determined upon ; that
subscriptions to defray the expence have been entered
into, and that'confident expectations are entertained
of the success of the Petition. We know no( on
what ground these'expeetations rest.

V.
HIS LOIDANIP was of opiGOODSON /LLISON. ,
fr nionOm the papers before him, that
the defendants had not *particle of beneficial interest in the estate
in, question ; and that with respect to the plaintiff; be could
not call upon a trustee to convey part of a trust estate._...
It appeared that part of the trust estate had been sold,
and the only way the plaintiff could compel a con-
veyance to the purchaser of that part was, to amend
the record by calling upon the trustee to convey that por-
portion to the pucbaser, and the residue to the plaintiff as the
equitable owner. The case,-therefore, stands over for considera-
tion on the part of the plaintiff, as to whether or not he will so
amend his record.

'S rrrcz.
Mr. HART moved forAIASTER the usualo annual order to shut the Mat-
ter's Office—Order made.

Mr. RUCK Y. STACZY.
r. HART h 0 RUCK
had understood the Court accurately, so
that he might not get his client into a dilemma, namely, that the
defendant was to go on .to complete his building pending the trial
of the issues. • '

His Lam:4nm thought, if Mr. Hart took the trouble reading
the order the Court had made, he would find that what he had
now mentioned was distinctly made part of the order.
Mr. H011.14Z added, on condition that he undertook to abide by
the decision of the Court, to pull the building down again if the
issues were decided against LORDSwir said, certainly.
Mr. HART observed, "or to build it a little higher."—(A
laugh).

LORD CODILTINAY D. HOSKINS.
A little motion was mad, in this case, though discussed at much
length, respecting the examination of a witness ; and the point
worthy of notice in it was, that the notice of motion had been
given on the Ath of October last, to be made before this branch of
the Court.
His LORDSHIP; however, could not conceive why the motion had
not been made before the Vice-Chancellor, which unquestionably it
ought to have been; and if the notice of motion had been given
for the other Court, it could not have been more than a few days
undisposed of. His Lordship trusted the public would not con-
sider that it was the fault of this branch of the Court that the
parties had not been heard long ago. It was a grievOus evil, at-
tributable to those who had the conduct of the proceedings, and
an evil not by any means sufficiently looked into. The Court
dismissed the motion, with costs.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, GUILOHAILL..—(iftIb DAY.)
SANDERSON AND ANOTHER V. NESTOR.
Mr. ABRAHAM opened the pleadings.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated the case.
This was an action to recover from the defendant,
an army agent, residing in craven-street, Strand, the
sum of 955/. 15s. being the amount of three bills of
exchange, dated June 1819, payable within six months,
and accepted by 'him. The plaintiffs were wine-mer-
chants, who, sin the course of de. alinr, with Mr. Morris,
who was also a wine,nierchant, residing in Northum-
berland-street, Strand, discounted one of these,
amounting to 5281. 2s. drawn by him on the defend-
ant, and took the'other two bills in account. When
the bills became, due they were dishonoured. Shortly
afterwards 'tile brought two actions against
the defendant for,the.bills,severally, and being defeated
in these they brought an action for'the three collec-
tively, which was tried in Ireland ;. on that occasion,
the Jury, after deliberating for a considerable time,
came into Court_ and told- the Judge, that eleven of
them had agreed to find a verdict for the defendant,
but that they could not prevail orr the Other to give
his consent, whereupon the defendant agreed to with-
draw a juror. This is the fourth action for the same
bills.

•
Several witnesses were examined to prove the au-
thenticity of the bills. it also appeared in evidence,
that the plaintiff's continued to give credit to Morris
after the bills hid/been diShonotired.
Mr. SCARLETT addressed the Jury for the do-
fendant. He said that the circumstances under which
Nagar had accepted the bills were-,-That he hall purchased of
Morris his good will in the situation of army-agent, which con-
sisted in the sale of commissions, and paying the pensions of of.
fleets' widows, &c. This he subsequently found not to be illegal,
and conceiving that he had been imposed upon in other respects,
he gave notice to Morrie, and the holders of the bills, that the
business was not such as had been represented, that consequently
the considerations failing, he would not pay the bills. The
Learned Counsel contended, that under all these circumstances it
was evident, that Morris could not sue the defendant, and that
consequently the plaintiffs, who might be considered as Morris.
agents, were not entitled to recover.
Several witnesses were called to prove a collusion between the
plaintiffs and Morris..-and that thibilla were in the latter's hands
after they became due; but their testimony was insufficient to
establish these facts.

The Loan Cum Jusricx said, that the plaintiffs had clearly
made out their claim, and were entitled to a verdict. The Jury
accordingly gave .a verdict for the ylaintiffs—Damages 7181.
The Court of Common lieu was occupied the whole of this
morning by the cause of hronyffenny v. Hartland, of little public
interest, and wbie,h was not finished when we went to press.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.
COURT OF CHANCERY. (This DAT.)
LANCASTER. V. ATKINSON.
We detailed the circumstances of this case yester-
day, which, as the Lord Chancellor said, ought never
to have been heard of in a Court of Justice. It will
be recollected to be the case of one sister charging an-
other with appropriating more of their common father's
property to her own use than she was entitled to un-
der the will, directing an equal distribution of the pro-
perty. The opinion of the Court was, that there
ought to be two issues tried ; the one, to try how
much property the one sister htul possessed herself of,
and the other, how much the other sister had got hold
of. Although his Lordship now directed these issues,
the parties ought not to be surprized, if, in the
course of the trial the judge should stop it, and
say, he would not permit such a proceeding in
a Civil Court of Justice. If the parties had common
sense, they would now compromise their differences,
that the world might hear no more ofthem.