The Sun.
London, England, 1844-11-18 00:00:00

RAILWAY SHARER.

St. Germain ...... 920 .. 920 .. 920 .. 920
Versailles, • 406 25 .. 410 .. 406 25 .. 410
L. 8.•• •• •• 292 50 .. 295 .. 292 50 .. 295
Rouen.. 6611. 04 6114114 i *4lOOO . 1000 .•1005 ..1005
Rouen to Havre.... 775 .. 715 -• 7t6 7TI
Orleans ..........1015 .•1017 ..1015 —lOl5

Strasburg to 8a1e......•.•. 275 .. 276 25 25
Avignon to Marseilles— •••• 775 • 775 .. 775 775
;RAILWAY SHARES FOR SETTLING, Nov. 16.
402 50 .. 402 50 .. 402 50 .. 402 50

L.B•••••••• •••• 292 50 . 298 75 .. 292 50 .. 295
Rouen 998 75 ..1002 50 .. 998 75 ..1002 50
Rouen to Havre.. ..... ...•• 776 25 .. 776 25 .• 776 25 .. 776 25
Orleans ....

Strasburg to Bale ... • ...• • • 275 .. 270 25 .. 275
Avignon to Martelnes • • • • • • 845 • • 853 75 .. 815
RAILWAYS FOR THE ACCOUNT. r ov. 30,
Versailles, R. 8.• •
L.B ....... 295 .. 296 25 .. 295
Rouen ....................1005 ..1006 25 ..1000

•• 270 2fs
A5l

.. 412 51
.. 295
..1005

Rouen to Havre • . 777 50 780 777 50 .. 780
Orleans..• ................1017 50 ..1018 78 ..1015 —lOO6 25
Strasburg to 8a1e•......... 276 25 .. 277 50 .. 276 25 .. 277 50
Avignon to Marseilles.. • • .. 848 75 .. 855 .. 848 75 • • 651 25

The public Ball for the relief of the distressed
Polish exiles is announced to take place to-morrow
(Tuesday the 19th) at Guildhall ; and as it will be
conducted on a most splendid scale, and the cause is
one of charity, we cannot doubt that it will be fully
and fashionably attended.

THIS DAY'S NEWS

CHANCERY.—(THIS DAY.)
The Lord Chancellor took his seat to-day shortly be-
fore eleven o'clock.
THE DUKE OF LEEDS v. EARL AMHERST.
The further arguments in this part heard appeal Here
resumed to-day, and occupied the Court the whole
morning.

VICE-CHANCERY.—(THIS DAY.)
The Vice-Chancellor of England was occupied the
whole morning with causes of no general interest.
(Before Sir J. WIGRAM.)
His Honour was occupied this morning for somo time
in rehearing a portion of the arguments in Neeson v.
Clarkson, a case which has been already pert heard.
The case of Tamlyn v. Reynolds was then ordered to
stand over, and Cooke v. Taylor proceeded with.

QUEEN'S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)
Sittings in Banco.
DOE DEM ANGELL V. ANGELL.
The arguments in this part-heard case were resumed
this morning. Mr. Peacock was heard in conclusion,
and the Court reserved its decision.

BAIL COURT.—(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
GILL V. FIGOTT.-THE LATE DERBY RACE.
-

This was a case originating i❑ the lately disputed race
between Orlando and Running Rein, decided in the
Court of Exchequer. The defendant was the treasurer
of a Derby club, and it was agreed, in a meeting of the
members after the race, that the prizes should be paid
to those who drew horses which were publicly declared
to be winners, and they ordered the treasurer to pay the
prizes accordingly. There were two prizes, one for the
first horse and the other for the second ; and it so
happened, in this case, that one person held both the
winning horses. But Running Rein having been found
-disqualified by the verdict of the jury in the case before
the Court of Exchequer, the holder of the third horse
claimed the second prize from the treasurer, who said
that he had paid it away in accordance with the resolu-
tion of the club. The plaintiff then brought the present
action against the defendant, who pleaded the general
issue.

Mr. GREENWOOD now moved for a rule that the de-
fendant might be at liberty to add another plea, and to
plead the illegality of the whole transaction, on the
ground that when he pleaded the general issue he had
not time to consult his pleader.—Rule nisi granted.

COMMON PLEAS.-(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
THE REGISTRATION.
Their Lordships this day commenced hearing the ap-
peals from the decisions of the revising barristers at the
late registrations.

PITT V. SMEADLEY.
This was an appeal against the revision of the list of
voters for Westminster. The case was not gone into,
the Court directing that it be again referred to the bar-
rister for a full statement of the facts.

WHITHORN V. THOMAS.
The appellant resided in Gloucester, carrying on busi-
ness as a wine-merchant. But he was a freeman of the
borough of Tewkesbury, and in order to sustain his fran-
chise, he took a lodging in the borough, at the rent of
9d. per week. The vote was objected to on the ground
that the claimant was not a resident freeman of Tewkes-
bury, in the meaning of the Reform Act. The barrister
decided against the vote, and it appeared that Mr.
Whithorn had slept in Tewkesbury only twelve times in
the half year preceding the registration.
The Conn; having heard Mr. Sergeant Byles in sup-
port of the appeal, and Mr. Cockburn against it, ruled
that the decision of the barrister was right, the residence
was not sufficient to entitle the freeman to vote, and the
claim must be disallowed.