The Sun.
London, England, 1845-11-29 00:00:00

NG, NOVEMBER 29, 1845.

Ditto New 3 —
Northampton, Banbury,
and Cheltenham 2 —
Nottingham and Boston 1%
Nottingm., Erewsh.Val-
lay, and Manchester 1% —
Nottingham and Mans-

5%

11 1%,4 di&

field— —
Oxford, Gosport, Ports -
mouth, & Southampta 425. —
Oxford and Worcester... 121
Oxford, Witney, and
Cheltenham..... l% —
Perth and Inverness ... 2%
Pilbrow Atmospheric ... 1
Portsmouth Direct ...... 33/4
Prestonind Wyre 5O
Do. % Shares
Reading, Guildford, and
Reigate
Richmond
Rugby, Derby, and Man-
chester ... 2% —
Rugby and Huntingdon 2
Rugby, Leamington, and
Warwick
Scottish Central
Scottish Midland l%
Sheffield & Manchesterloo

Do. Quarter Shares... S
Shrews., Wolverhamp.,
_..

. .
Dudley, and Birrn 21,4e..... .. ... 314
Shropshire Mineral 42s. .... ...
Shropshire Union
Shrewsbury & Hereford 2%
Sligo and Shannon l%
Somersetshire Midland 2% - -
South Devon
South Midland 425....... 1% p . 215 p
South Staffordshire June 2%
South Eastern & Dover 3312 s 4d... 3314 33
Do., No. 1 l2
Do., No. 2.
Do., No. 4
Southampton, Manches-
ter, & Oxford Junction 2
St. Alban's, Hatfield, and

Hertford Junction ...
Staines and Richmond.... 1
Staffordsb. & Shropshire 27 —
South Wales ..... ..... ... 2% 3 23,4
Taw Vale Extension ...
Tean and Dove Valley 1% — ......
Trent Valley
Trent Valley and Holy-
head Junction 2%
Tring, Reading, and
Basingstoke
Ulverstone and Furness ......
Vale of Death
Warwick & Cheltenham 2% —..-.. —
Warwick and Worcester 425.
Waterford and Kilkenny 3 ..
Waterford and Limerick 7%
Waterfd,Wxfrd,Wicklw,
and Dublin
W aterford, Wexford, and
Valentia
Waveney Valley ..... -
Welch Midland
West Cornwall 2 .. .. 1%% 1
West Yorkshire
West London,Old Shares 20 .....
West End and Southern
Counties
Wexford and Carlow
Wisbeach and St. Ives... 2
Wilts, Somerset, and
Southampton
Wilts, Somerset, & Wey-
mouth - ..... 2%
Worcester,Hereford,Ross,
and Gloucester 425.......
Worcester, Tinbury, and
Ludlow
Worcester, Shrewsbury,
and Crewe Union..... 1%.....
Worcester and S. Wales 425.
Worcester,Warwick, and
Rugby . 42s.
Yarmouth and Norwich. 20 —
Ditto, New
York and Carlisle 23/4
York and Lancaster 2%
York and North Midland 50 —.

Ditto % Shams 25 — ... ..
Ditto Scarboro' Branch. 25 —
Do Selby 20
Do. Extension ... 5
FOREIGN RAILWAYS.

Anglo-Belgian... 4
Barbadoe,s — ......

Boulogne and Amiens... 8 71/2
Bordeaux & Mediterran. 2
Bordeaux, Toulouse, and

Cette (Mackenzie's) 2 .....
Do. (Espelete's) ' 2 ...• • ••••••••
Calais, Dunkrk, and West
4' Flanders
Callao, Lima, and Pacific
Coast. 1 - ••• •.• ... 00000000
Central of Spain ...
Ceylon .. .... ss.
Demerara 2% ......
Dendre Valley 2
Dijon and Mulhouse ... 2
Dutch Rhenish S
East Indian ... .-.. .... ss.
Eastern Belgian Junctn. 2%
Fampoux & Hazebrouk 2
Great North. of France
Constituted 5 ...... 101 AL 1114 10% 10%
Great Paris and Lyons 2
Great Western Bengal... ss.
Great Western Canada... 314 ...... 33
Jamaica S.Mid. Junction 1
Jamaica North Midland 1
Do. Extension 1
Jersey
Lolly= and Jemeppe... 4 ... . 14%
Lyons and Avignon 2
Luxembourg...
Madrid and Valentia.... 2 ... ..

Mauritius ..
Namur and Liege
North Jamaica... ...... ... 1
Orleans and Vierzon ... 10 ......
Orleans and Bordeaux... 6 ...... 914 9
Over Yssel 413 s 4d 214 .... 2
Paris &Lyons(Laffitte's) 2
Pans and Lyons (Gan-
neron'5)... ... ...
Paris & Lyons, (Calon's) 2
Paris & Lyons (Sud Est) 2
Paris and Orleans 2O
Pans and Rouen
Paris and Strasbourg
(Ganneron's) 2 ...... 13/,
Do. (Compte de L'Est) 2 ...... 1% l.
• Ditto ( Aymards)...... 214
•••••• 1
Paris and St. Quentin ...
.2

Rouen and Havre ...... 13
Royal North of Spam ... 2 ...... „. .
Sambre and Meuse ...... 6
Strasbourg and Bale ... 14

St. Laurerice & Atlantic
Tournay, Jurbise, Lau-
den, and Hasselt....... 4
Tours and Nantes (Mac-
kenzie's) .........-..... 4

Do. de. (Lefebvre's) 2
Ditto (O'Neill's) 2 ...... . •••
Trinidad
Verona and Ancona... 3
West Flanders .. 4
MINES

214
____._
Real del Monte Unregd.

MARKET XI_I7,IVS.-(THIS DAY.)

COVENT-Q&RDZN.

The supplies of both Fruit and ireieTal:les were tolerably
extensive, yet the trade ruled firm at our quotations :-
-Potatoes from 2s 6d to 5s 6d per cwt; Turnips, is to 2s;
Carrots, 4s 6d to 6s ; Greens, Is 6d to 2s 3d ; and Leeks,
8d to is per dozen bunches; Onions, is 6d to 2s 6d; Apples,
Is 3d; to 4s; Pears, 3s to 6s; and Spinach, is to is 64 per
half-sieve; Hot-house Grapes, 2s 6d to ss; Pine-apples,
5s to 8s; and Filberts, 4d to id per lb; Bed Cabbages, 3s
to 6s per dozen ; Celery, 8d to Is 8d ; Brocoli, Is to 2s 3d ;
and Horse-radish, 23 to 5s per bundle ; New Oranges, 8s
to 12s; Lemons, 8s to 138; and Walnuts, 8d to is per 100.

-
NUNGERPOND.
Although the supplies of most kinds of produce were but
moderate, the general demand ruled heavy, at but little
variation in prices.
NEWVATZ AND LZADDNNAZZ.

Prime Beef, Mutton, and Pork sold steadily at full prices.
Otherwise the trade ruled inactive—Beef, from 2s 8d to 3s Ed;
Mutton, 3s 6d to 4s 8d; Veal, Es 10d to 4s 1041; and Pork,
Es 10d to 5s 4d per Sibs, by the carcase. Turkeys, 41 6d
to 6s 6d; Geese, 5s to 7s; Ducks, is 8d to 2s Ed; Tam.
Rabbits, is 4d to Is 9d; Wild ditto, Ed to Is ; Pigeons, 6d
to Ed ; and roasting Pigs, 8s to 10s each ; Fowls, 4s to 9s
par couple; Pheasants, 3s to 4s; Partridges, is 3d to 2s
8d; Hares. 2s 6d to Es 8d; sad Grouse, is Ed to 2s each.

COMMON PLEAS.—(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings at Nisi Prius, before Lord Chief Justice TYNDAL
and a Middlesex Common Jury.)
WALTON V. TROWER AND ANOTHER.
This was an action against the assignees of a bankrupt, as
assignees of a house, and was brought to recover damages for
the injur% done to that house by the removal of certain fix-
tures, and for the value of those fixtures. For the defence
it was represented that the defendants, though they were the
bankrupt's assignees, were not the assignees of the house;
and, also, that the fixtures removed were set up by the
bankrupt for the
.purposes of trade, which he, or his assignees,
had therefore a right to remove.
On the part of the plaintiff several witnesses were called
to prove the following facts :—The house in question, which
is situated in King-street, Hammersmith, was let to the
bankrupt, a person named Johnson, at a rent of 1001. per
annum, on a lease for twenty-one years. On Johnson's failing
in business, the landlord seized a portion of his goods for a
sum of money due for rent, the whole of which he re-
covered. It was after this that he became bankrupt. The
assignees knowing that part of the fixtures were erected
by Johnson, had a sale in the house, at which a folding-door,
a water-butt, a service-pipe, and some other articles,were dis-
posed of. The house was left in a very dilapidated state, the
holes which had been dug in order to take out the service-pipe
and other holes in the roof and walls had been left open.
All the fixtures except the service-pipe were admitted to be
fixtures erected by defendant for purposes of trade. The
damage done, and value of fixtures, were estimated by one of
plaintiff's witnesses at 16/. 155., of which one-half was for
the fixtures. Four months after the sale the key and lease
of the house were given up to the landlord.
Mr. Sergeant BYLES addressed the jury at great length on
the part of the defendants. The assignees, he said, were not ne-
cessarily assignees of the house, though they were of the
bankrupt, and they could not be made so unless they deli-
berately accepted the lease. Now the only evidence of their
accepting the lease was their taking possession on the
day of the sale. Even this, he contended, was not an ac-
ceptance of the:lease' as, in two cases to which he, Mr. Ser-
geant Byles, referred, it bad been held that the entering
a house to sell the goods, and even the offering the lease for
sale, before giving it up to the landlord, was not an accept-
ance of the lease, and did not render the assignees assignees
of the house. He, Mr. Sergeant Byles, therefore submitted
that this action was wrongly brought against the present
defendants. Again it was admitted, that all the
fixtures sold were trade fixtures, erected by the
bankrupt himself, except one, which - was of but
little value. Now, though fixtures, even if erected by the
tenant, are the property of the landlord, yet such is not the
case with trade fixtures, which, when erected by the tenant,
are his own. Now, as the value of the fixtures was one-half
the estimated damage, this reduced the injury to 8/. 7s. 6d ;
and it had been proved, on cross-examination, that the
bankrupt had improved the value of the premises to the
amount of 250/., by outhouses and other erections, so that he
had, even at his own calculation, gained 2401. by the bank-
rupt's improvements.
Mr. Sergeant BYLES here called several witnesses to show
that the plaintiff was aware from the beginning that the
defendants did not intend to accept the lease, and also to
show that all the fixtures sold were tenants' fixtures,

and that the amount of injury done to the pre-
miles was exaggerated. A letter was also put in
in evidence, in which the plaintiff requested the assignees to
decide whether they would or would not accept the lease,
and if not, to send the key and lease back to him, which
was done.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE summed up, resting the case almost
entirely on the question whether the defendants had or had
not accepted the responsibility of assignees of the house.
The jury returned a verdict for the defendants.

EXCHEQUER.--(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings after Term, before Mr. Baron PLATT and a
Common Jury.)
GREERSON V. EDGLEY.

This was an action of assumpsit brought to recover 3401.,
the amount of the bill of exchange endorsed by the defendant
to the plaintiff, to which the defendant had pleaded non
assumpsit, traversing the allegation in the declaration of the
notice of dishonour.

Mr. Jarvis and Mr. Cowling appeared for the plaintiff, and
Mr. Lush for the defendant.

The defendant's handwriting to the bill was admitted by
a Judge's order, which was put in, and a witness
afterwards called to prove that he gave a notice of
the dishonour addressed to the defendant, at his pri-
vate residence at Coleshill, near Manchester, to be
put: into the Manchester post-office. The following
morning he met the defendant, who told him that he had not
received the notice which the boy had posted on the pre-
vious evening, but he had seen a similar notice which had
been addressed to another endorser, named Good.
Mr. Luau contended that -this was no evidence that any
notice of the dishonour had been sent to the defendant.

Mr. JARVIS urged that it was. The defendant might not
have received the written notice of dishonour, but a wit-
ness had proved that he did receive a parole notice.
Mr. LUSH admitted that a parole notice had been given,
but it was given a thy too late.
Mr. Baron PLAIT overruled the objection, reserving, how-
ever. to Mr. Lush the right of moving fora new trial, and
the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff.