Current:

Northern Star (1837-1852), 16th June 1849, Edition 1 of 3, Page 8, Untitled Article

Page 8
Page 8
8 of 8

On this page

  • Departments (3)
    • 'Central €iunnwrt <£ottrt.
    • mamtii «*• ¦ ¦ . - ¦
    • Printed by WILLIAM RIDER, of No. 5, Macclosfield-street ;
  • Text (11)
  • Transcript

    • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

      Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

      Untitled Article

      in all , for miscellaneous expenses , from £ 315 , 000 to £ 703 , 000 , or 143 per cent . In 1-347 the total amount liad risen to £ 1 , 209 , 000 , being an increase of seventyfour per cent * since 183-3 . Parliament had relieved the counties of charges formerly paid out of tlio rates to the tmount of £ 3 , 532 , 000 . Some couatics had appointed finance committees to attend to their expenditure , which was all very well , hut would not satisfy the ratepayers . Mr . 11 . Dhcmmosd , though entertaining some doubt as io the means by which the bill was propesed to be worked out , seconded the motion that it be read a second time .

      Sir J . Pakixgtox was not opposed to the principle of county boards ; hut . uelieviug the bill to be an impracticable one , he trusted ifc would not receive the support of the government , and moved , as an amendment that a select committee be appointed to inquire into the expenditure of the county rates with the view of ascertaining whether a more effective and economical system than the present could not lie adopted . ilr . ItonEitT Palmer , preferring the appointment Of a , committee of inquirr , rather than sending the bill to a select committee , seconded the

      amendment . Sir G . Gret was favourable to the appointment of financial county boards , into which the principle of representation " should enter , not meaning any dur upon the magistracy , who had exereiSGd a -watchful control over the expenditure , which , as ratepayers , they had a direct interest in keeping down . But they wereonly one class of ratepayers , and if the principle of admitting , other classes to control the expenditure liad been the whole of the bill , he should not object to the second reading ; hut to the details he had almost the same objections as Sir Z . Pakington , and , in its present state , he could not support the toll . If it were to be referred

      to a select committee , the powers of the committee must be enlarged to the extent of that proposed by the amendment , so that practically , there was no difference between the two propositions , and he thought the preferable course was to appoint a select committee to inquire into the whole subject . The discussion afterwards diffused itself over matters chiefly of detail , or connected with the choice of the alternative courses of proceeding ; Mr . IIexiet , Mr . V . SMim , Mr . Patiex , Mr . Packe , 31 r . 0 . Lewis , Mr . Miles , Mr . E . Dexiso . x , and other members taking part in it , most of them approving the principle of representation in the administration of county finances .

      Mr . llmtB in Ins reply said he asked no more than to establish the principle of representation . Be considered he bad been deceived by the government . The Home Secretarv ( Sir G . Grey ) and the First lord of the Treasury ( Lord J . Russell ) had been asked to bring in this bill , but although they expressed their approval of its principle , they declined to introduce it in the House , lie ( Mr . llume ) had undertaken that duty , and now—to use a common expression—he found he was sold . ( Laughter . ) The House divided , when there were—For the second reading 96

      Acrninst . it . 153 Majority against the bill ... - —57 The question was then put on the amendment , when Mr . Milxee Gibson moved an amendment to it , to the effect that the inquiry of the proposed select committee should embrace some modo -whereby the control of the rate-payers over county expenditure might be made more effectual . After some discussion , the gallery was cleared for a division , but none took place ; an adjournment of the debate was moved , in order that ihe amendment , as proposed to be amended by Mi * . Gibson should be printed . The House divided , and the numbers were—For adjourning the debate 83 Against 131 -Majority against - —48 Lord Bkooke then moved that the House do now

      adjourn . The discussion on this motion was progressing , ¦ when six o ' clock having arrived , the House adjourned amidst great laughter . ( From our Second Edition of lastwcek . ) THURSDAY , Jcxb 7 . HOUSE OF LORDS . —The Baskrcpi Law Coxsoiibation Bhx was read a third time , on the motion of lord Brougham . Certain amendments -were brought up and added to the hill , which was then passed and ordered to be sent to the House of Commons . The Bill foe the Pbotectiojt of Womex passed through committee , on the motion of the Bishop of Oxfokd , and the third reading was fixed for Thursday next . Some other business was then disposed of , and their lordships nojonrncd . HOUSE OF COMMONS . — Only thirty-four members being present at four o ' clock , it stood necessarily adjourned to this day .

      ( From oar Third Edition ojlastuiuik . j FRIDAY , Jbxe 8 . HOUSE OF LORDS . —The Earl of HAiutoTnvr gave notice that on Monday he should move for a select committee on the Sale of Beer Bill . lord Bkocgham proposed Ms motion on Gaxada to Tuesday wpek . Lord Staxlet presented a petition from the Lord Mavor and Corporation of London praying to be exempted from the operation of the Leasehold Tenure of Lands ( Ireland ) Bill in regard to their property in that country . After some discussion on the principle of exempiion , which it appeared had been already embodied in the bill in one instance , Lord Campbell postponed the third reading till Monday . The House then a Jiourned .

      HOUSE OF COMMONS . —On the motion that the House , on rising , do adjourn till Monday , a somewhat lengthened * conversation took place upon the subject of the late evictions in Toomcvara and JSlrusb , during the progress of which Sir R . Peel admitted that there might be difficulty in getting the law to reach the case , but thought that an expression of indignation on the part of the House might lave the effect of putting some limit , under existing circumstances , to the extreme exercise of legal power , and of checking scenes of barbarity such as iio civilise ! country had ever before witnessed . On the motion for going into committee on the Poor Belief ( Ireland ) Bin .

      Sir U . W . Bahkox moved : — " That the property at present rated to support the poor in Ireland is totally inadequate for that purpose ; that in England " there are sixty-seven millions of property rated to the poor , the population being about fifteen millions ; * whilst in Ireland there are only thirteen millions of property rated to the poor , with a ( much poorer ) population of about eight millions ; showing nearly three times more property in England per head to support tlie poor than in Ire-Luid ; that therefore it is necessary to provide fur ther means for support of the poor in Ireland , in order to remove the extreme pressure which is now crushing down the ratepayers in that country , and cheeking the energies of all employers and capitalists . '

      Sir . "VY . SoJtsnviTXE replied to the arguments used by the lion , baronet in support of his motion , and moved as an amendment that the Speaker do leave the chair . Colonel Duxxe supported the motion of the lion , member ibr Waterford . Mr . B .. Osborxe , in an energetic speech , drew the attention -of the House to the erils resulting from estates in the Court of Chancery being under the control of receivers , not one shilling of the rentals of which were applied to the improvement of the estates . He called upon the House to appoint a . committee of inquiry into the subliiinself that

      ject , when he pledged a plan should be -submitted calculated to remove the evils at present existing , and to hold out some immediate hope of a better state of things . Lord J . itcssEU . had no objection to the proposal of the hon . member for Middlesex , that there should be an irieuiry ; and if the hon . member would move for the appointment of a committee , he ( Lord J . Kussell ) -would give his support to the motion , and the Solicitor-General would be ready to give every assistance towards passing such a measure as the lloase might approve . It was not , however , by one measure , but by . a series of measures , that rest could be given to Ireland .

      After some further discussion , Sir Hesut \ V . ¦ BARit ox ' sanotion was negatived by a majority of 114 , thenEmbers 30 to 144 ; and the House vent into committee on the Soor Belief ( Ireland ) Bill .

      Untitled Article

      and their condition was most heart-rending . Their names are given as follows : —Michael Cussack , Joseph Lynch , Bridget . O'Gorman , spinster , — Connevs , "William Brew , John Hosan , and P « tick M'Toque ; the survivors of the Maria ' s crew are : William Collins ( mate ) , John Pickering ( seaman ) , and Michal Tague ( cabin-boy ) , making in all , out ol the 121 souls on board , only twelre saved . Inconsequence of the brig Falcon being short of water , those who were picked up by her were transferred on board the Roslin Castle , which proceeded direct to Quebec , and arrived there last Saturday fort-In addition to the loss of the Maria , the Hannah , another emigrant ship , foundered near the same bearing . The master and a portion of the crew left the ship when she was foundering with the two hundred passengers , many of whom were subsequently rescued , having been picked up four days after the melancholy event , and had been landed at Quebec .

      Untitled Article

      NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT . GUBBIX 3 V . FEAKGUS O ' CONSOR . This was an action brought by the plaintiff , a shoemaker , living in Elm-street , in this town , to recover two sums of £ 2 10 s . each , paid by the plaintiff in April , 184 G , and March , 1847 , to "William Mnnday , of this town , and agent to the defendant , for shaves in a scheme called at different periods the " Chartist Co-operative Land Society , " and the " ^ National Land Society . " Mr . Heeke appeared for the plaintiff , and Mr . Roberts for the defendant . Mr . Bccke stated that he sought to recover the sum paid in April , 1846 , as money paid on an illegal

      consideration , the Company not having been registered at all ; and so much of the sum paid in 1847 , in excess of 10 s . in £ 100 , when the Company was only provisionally registered . He also sought to recover on the ground that the money was paid on a consideration which had wholly failed , the Company having failed to obtain complete registration within a year , and the provisional registration not having been renewed from year to year , and the Company having therefore exploded . These were the legal grounds on which he rested his case . In support of the alleged facts , the learned gentleman called

      Eliza Gcbbivs , who said—lam the wifeof Charles Gubbins , the plaintiff . My husband is a shoemaker , and cannot either read or write . I used to read to him the Northern Star and prospectuses of the Land Company . He sent "me to pay to Mr . Munday £ 2 10 s ., which I did , and 2 s . 4 d . I was to pay for rules and other expenses . I received at that time a card , and a little book , the rules of the Society . The certificate was sent a few days afterwards . — Cross-examined by Mr . Roberts : My husband was an active friend of the Company until he found he was not likely to get any benefit from it . It may be three months ago since he ceased to be so . He did not attend every meeting of the Company . I believe he attended one or two . Don't know that he voted for a delegate . —By the Court : I paid the money to "William Munday , in Silver-street , in this town .

      Charms Gtjbbixs : I am plaintiff in thia cause . On 5 th March , 1847 , 1 went to Mi * . Munday , at the Temperance Hotel in this town , and paid him £ 2 10 s . for a share in the Land Company , and 2 s . M . Expenses and Rules . I have never received any benefit or advantage of any kind from the scheme . Xever consented to the purchase of land , nor was ever consulted about it . Sever heard of the change of name nor of amount paid for the shares . Xever attended any meeting in London , nor over saw Mr . O'Connor . —Cross-examined by Mr . Roberts : I first became dissatisfied about four months ago . I became hostile to the Company because it made a failure ; they could not go on with it . They did away with the balloting for the land . Why , I

      can't say . I heard in the Northern Star that it was so . I did not hear that a committee of the House of Commons had said that the ballot was illegal . My wife read the Northern Star to me about once a fortnight . If the ballot had continued , and I saw any prospect of getting my four-acre share , I might have gone on ; but the prospect is very different now from when I subscribed . Working men can't get their living on the allotment . —By the Court : I did not see . any prospect of getting the land , and if I got an allotment now , I wouldn't go . Several working men have come back from them . —By Mr . Roberts : I don't believe the scheme could be carried out , and if it could , I wouldn't have anything to do with ifc . Mr . Driver has come back . I don ' t

      know any one else in this town who has . I don t know any other , but I've heard in the Northern Star that a good many had come back . "When I gave my money I expected I was to have four acres of land and £ 30 . —His Honour : You couldn't expect four acres of land and £ 30 for £ 5 ? Mr . Fear-US O'Connor said so . —Mi * . Roberts : Did you believe it ? Yes , I did . Did you believe anybody else's money was to go towards buying the land ? Yes . Did you expect the land would be bought by your money and the money of others ? Fes . And to be divided into lots of four and two acres , and a ballot then to take place to see who should have

      them ? Yes . Then I believe it was part of the plan that the rents should be mortgaged , and the money go to buy more land ? I can't say as to that . There was to be a rent ? Oh yes , * I was to pay a rent of £ 5 a year for the two-acre share . The tract of land to be bought with the first money would not be enough to locate you all , would it ? I believe not . Can ' t say whether Driver soW his share . Have not attended above two meetings , one was on the 19 th ^ November . There was so much confusion , I couldn't hear half what was going on . Heard nothing about a change of name or ballot . 2 Jever heard of anybody selling an allotment . If I'd got an allotment I should have sold it . I should have

      advertised it and sold it for £ 30 , if I could have got it . I don ' t think that would have been too much , because I was to have £ 30 in money . I have never heard anything about registrations . —By Mr . Becke : I hare heard of a great many people coming back . — [ Mr . Becke then read from the Northern Star , as the organ of the Company , several very unfavourable accounts of the condition of the allotments and the tenants . One man said he could not get on , for his ground had not been cultivated since the days of Adam . Another , that all his potatoes had quite failed ; another that his land was not of good quality , and that he was "without food or clothes . ] The witness Gubbins said that it was hearing such statements as these read that made him think the scheme impracticable .

      "William Mundat stated that he was Branch Secretary to the Land Company , appointed by- the body in Northampton . He communicated to the Directors in London . Had attended two meetings as a delegate , one at LowLands and one at Birmingham . Mr . O' Connor was present at these meetings . The society used to be called Mr . O'Connor ' s Society by those who didn't understand it . The meeting at Birmingham was October 23 , 1848 , the business being to get the Company registered as a Joint Stock Company . "Witness was also to vote for the abolition of the ballot , which was declared to be illegal by the House of Commons , and the adoption of a bonus instead . On the 19 th of November lie attended a meeting in this town , and gave a report of the proceedings of the Birmingham conference . There was only one oppositionist . Witness bought his share . He sold it under price . The general fceliner

      of the allottees on the Company's estates was , that they had suffered a severe struggle from the failure of the crops , but they did not blame the Society . "Witness bid £ 20 for a three-acre allotment at Lowbands , three weeks ago . and could not » et it . The name of the oppositionist was Lightwood . He said the report proved that the thing was a failure , and that he would advertise his share in the Northampton papers . It was then witness bought it for nineteen shillings . Lightwood had paid £ 2 10 s . for it . The name of the Society has been altered two or three times . There were delegates who said the allottees were in an awful state of destitution , and others contradicted it . There was a feeling amongsome of the members to get what they could , and go . The abandonment of the ballot was to get the Society legalised . It would have been re-adopted if parliament had proved to be wrong in its opinion as to its illegality .

      Mr . George Deajt , an officer in the office of the Registrar of the Joint Stock Companies , stated that the Company was originally registered on the 24 th of October , 1846 , as the Chartist Co-operative Land Company , and its object was alleged to . be the purchasing of iand , erecting dwellings and schools , &c . On the 17 th of December the name was changed to the Kational Cooperative Land Company , and the business was said to be to purchase land , to erect houses , to allot the same to shareholders , to make advances of money to allottees , and raise money for the purposes aforesaid . On the 17 th of December a return of the provisional officers of the Company was entered , signed by Feargus O ' Connor , whose namea ppeared at the head of the list of Directors . —By Mr . Becke : On the 5 th of March , 1847 , when Gubbins took a shave in the Chartist Co-operative Land Company , and received a scrip certificate in that name , there

      was no such society in existence . On the 23 rd of October , 1847 , the provisional registration ought to have been , but had not been , renewed . ' The Company had never been completely registered . —Crossexamined by Mr . Roberts : Alterations in the titles of companies are frequently made , but the majority decidedly retain the same name to the end . It was impossible for him to say whether the circumstances he had described would or would not vitiate the concern . The effect of a provisional registration running out . without renewal at the proper time would be that it would be registered as a new society . It frequentl y happened that such was the case . The renewal of the certificate ot registration was refused by the . Registrar . Does not know why . - James Driver ; lama shoemaker , at Northampton . Til 1846 r took three shares in . the Chartist Cooperative Land Company . I paid the money to JIunday , and . received scrip certificates . I had an allotment at Lowbands , ia Worcestershire . - Went

      Untitled Article

      therein 1847 . Saw Mr . O'Cennor there many times . He frequently spoke to me about the mode of cultivation . I sold my allotment , and we went to BromsgroTe to transfer it . Mr . Doyle said he could not act without the sanction of the co-directors , but Mr . O'Connor could do the whole business . Mr . O'Connor did the business by himself in a few ininutes . I didn't find the allotment answer my expectations . I could have made a living at it with my own trade in addition . The generality of the tenants were not satisfied . The last report I had from them was very bad . By Mr . Roberts : If a man has got capital he may srofc a livinc on the allotment ; if not , he can do gCb H living Oil IUU iUWlXimuu , kx ui / u , uc uuu uu

      better at home . With capital and industry he may do well , but he may do as well at home . I subscribed in June , 1846 , thinking it would be advantageous , but I didn't find it so . I have heard that all the tenants wanted to sell , but couldn't get customers . They wished they could have got out as well as I did . ' I sold my share for £ 90 , from which there was to be deducted £ 2210 s . aid money , £ 15 loan money , £ 12 rent , and 2 * or three bushels of wheat . I received the balance . I believe if I had stopped I could have got a living , for I believe I could get a living any whore . Sly wife didn't like ifc . 1 stopped there twelve months . W hile I was there , there were a good many complaints . I saw none doing well .

      Mr . Roberts , for the defence , said ifc would have been desirable that this case should have been decided by the highest tribunal instead of b y this Court . Large sums of money were involved in it , and large numbers of individuals were deeply interested in the result , and it would have been far better that the points of Law upon which the decision depended , should have had the benefit of that argument and research which they would have received in the highest court of judicature . Whichever way his Honour ' s decision might go , it would not prevent an adverse decision on precisely the same case in other courts . Addressing himself next to the evidence before him , he contended that there was no evidence connecting Mr . O'Connor with the

      plaintiff , excepting that certain certificates had been produced which were not sworn to be in Mr . O'Connor ' s handwriting , and which in point of fact were not really signed by him . Then , as to the jurisdiction Of this court . He understood the case with respect to the first payment to be , that the society was an illegal society . Now he contended that a payment to the agent was not' a payment to the principal when a crinie is charged , and in this case , therefore , the cause of action arose in the place where the money "was received . Then as to the failure of consideration . If the failure lay in the non-registration , that arose in London , and hoi here . They were told that the payment was illegal —the payment that is of more than 3 d , per share . hut if

      He contended that it was perfectly legal , illegal , the parties were in part delicto , and the plaintiff could not recover against the defendant . He denied that the scheme was abandoned . The non-registration was no fault of theirs , but consequent on the report of the House of Commons that they were an illegal body , and they had since gone to the Queen ' s Bench for a mandamus to register . Therefore it was again desirable this question should not have been z-aised till the other had been decided . [ His Honour , interposing , said if that were the only question he should reserve his judgment until after that decision , but it did not at all appear to him to be the only one . What pressed upon his mind was that the defendant had no right to take more than 10 s . in every £ 100 . ] He denied that the non-registration had anything to do with

      the case . There was at first no idea of registration , and no attempt at it till October , 1846 , so that there could not be a shadow of illegality with regard to the first payment . The change of name and purpose he looked upon as nothing . But the principal observation upon which ho relied was , that as far as Mr . O'Connor was concerned , the transactions of the society were eminently characterised by good faith . A committee of the House of Commons had recognised a bona fides throughout . It stated that Mr . O Connor had expended money of his own to a large extent beyond what he had received , and if it should turn out that this society was not rcgistrable bylaw , it was Mr . O'Connor s intention to go to the House of Commons for an Act , either to go on in another form or to wind up the concern . His Honour deferred judgment till the next Court day .

      Untitled Article

      GCBBIXS V . O ' COKXOR . Manchester , June 7 th 1819 . Memorandum of Mr . Roberts . The following is my recollection of the principal points of argument . The case was tried yesterday , it Northampton . Mr . Beck , solicitor , of Northampton , appeared for the plaintiff , and I for the defendant . The short substance of Mr . Beck ' s opening was , that he sued the defendant , who was one of the Directors of the "National Land Company , " for two sums of £ 2 10 s . each ; one paid to the company by the plaintiff ( who held two shares ) in April , 1846 , and the other in March , 1847 , betweon these two periods the Company had been

      provisionally registered . The plaintiff did not ask the return ot the entire of these sums ; he' allowed a sum of 3 d . on each share , the full sum which the Directors of the Land Company were legally entitled to receive . Under the 23 rd clause of the Joint Stock Companies Act , the directors had no right , until the company was " completely registered , " to take more than ten per cent on each share . The shares were £ 2 10 s . each , and all that the Directors had taken beyond that ten per cent ., the persons who had paid the excess , had a right to recover as money had and received for their use . In the present instance , the Directors had taken the whole amount due on the shares .

      Mr . . Beck also contended that the plaintiff was on two other grounds entitled to recover . First , inasmuch as the scheme for . which he had paid his money , ' had , on several occasions , been altered in its name and purpose , and that , therefore , the consideration for which the money had been paid had failed . And secondly , because the promise of " complete registration" had not been fulfilled , and even the provisional registration necessary to keep the scheme alive had not been taken out . This was the plaintiff ' s case ; and it may as well be stated here , that the " ten per cent . " was through the argument recognised as the strongest point . The evidence in support of tlie plaintiff ' s case ,

      was the payment of money at the times stated to Munday . —Munday admitted the payments , that he was the secretary of the Land Company ; not , however , appointed by defendant , or the Company , but by the body of shareholders at Northampton ; that he sent the mom . 'y to the Board in London , never to Mr . O'Connor ; and that ho was in the habit of receiving back cards which he delivered to the members . Two of those cards he had given to plaintiff . There are several signatures to these cards . The name of " F . O'Connor" was one of them , but witness could not swear to the handwriting , nor could he swear who sent the cards , nor whether the two produced by plaintiff , were those which witness delivered to plaintiff—but they were of the same

      sort . The next witness for the plaintiff , was a clerk from the Registration Office : He proved the Joint Stock paper , wlierein the defendant appeared as a Director , and in one of which , signed by him , was the plaintiff ' s name as a shareholder . The defendant ' s signatures were admitted . The clerk also proved that the time for provisional registration had expired , and that the Company was not " completely registered . " Driver , a witness , proved that at some of the Land meetings , Mr . O'Connor had taken an active part , and was recognised as the head of the concern . Gubbins , the plaintiff , swore to the payment of the money—had received no benefit—never had notice

      of a ballot . He first became dissatisfied at the time that the Ballot was given up , about November last . He attended the meeting on the return of the Delegate froni Birmingham in November last . Made no opposition or complaint of what had been done at the Conference there . He about the same time became convinced that a man could not get a living upon four acres , and he did not sec any prospect of being located . These were his only complaints . Had lie been successful in the ballot , he should have sold Ms share , and would have taKen £ 30 . ( Most of this was got out , and with much difficulty , by crossexamination . ) He had paid his money to be put with the money of the other shareholders—the

      whole to be expended in the purchase of land , which was to be divided and allotted amongst those fortunate in the ballot ; these wore not to be absolute owners , hut were to pay a rent of £ 5 , ( he did not understand " five per cent ., " ) for their allotments . He admitted having attended two meetings , and never having made any complaint or opposition . ( It was sworn by Munday , that the plainiuL attended all the meetings , certainly as many as ten , and made no complaint . ) He ( plaintiff ) knew that Driver had been fortunate in getting an allotment , and had "been forced to leave—could not make a living of it . " Did not know that Driver had . sold his allotment .

      Driver , on cross-examination , said he had got an allotment , and sold ifc for £ 90 , out of which was deducted some money he had previously received , and £ 12 rent . He spoke strongly of the dissatisfaction of the allottees ; still he thought a man might get a living if he tried ; hut he must have a little capital- -He admitted as plaintiff had done , that he had paid his money to ho joined with the money of the other members for the purpose of paying expenses , and purchasing land , on which the members were to be located , the . rente then to be sold or mortgaged , and other lands purchased , < fec . The thing had not answered ab well as he- ( Drivei $ Jbad expected , hni bo far as he could judge , the pivaaises held out by Mr . O Connor had been performed . ' In explanation of plaintiffs not having received hoiuee of ballot , it was afterwards admitted on the part . of jjie plaintiff , that Gubbins was balloted the same ; asrfjbe others , and bad the same chance uade ? the baJJoW obtain-

      Untitled Article

      ing an allotment as any other member . It was proved by Munday , that the alteration from ballot to "bonus " was only to be made if it should turn out t hat the ballot was illegal . That all the changes had been sanctioned ' by the members , and tnatall the meetings were open to all the members . The Clerk of Mr . Whitmarsh , on cross-examination , admitted that , it very frequently ; happene ( that provisional registration was not applied tor till after the expiration of the year , and that , when . annlied for it had never been refused , . except in tlie

      instance of the Land Company-tnat tne reiusann that case was in ¦ consequence of doubt « s tothe legality of the Company ; that Whitmarsh had been served with a mandamus to register ; that changes in name and purpose were very frequent with companies : that the conatitution of the Company was eventually determined by the Deed of Settlement , which was obliged to be in conformity with the purposes expressed in the papers sent in ; and that the Land Company draft had been regularly sent in to Mr . Whitmarsh , and , as he " now saw bylna certificate /' aDprovedofbyhim . laintiff and the evi

      The above gives the p ' s case - dence of the witnesses ; there was some sparring as to the good or bad condition of the allottees—but to this the Judge said he gave no weight , For the defendant , I contended that no case nac been made out against Mr . ' O'Connor—no proof that Munday was his agent , or the agent of the Company or that the money ever reached the Company , Then I contended that the Northampton Court had no jurisdiction , for that the cause of action had not arisen in Northampton ; that the receipt of the money must , for criminal purposes , be taken to be by Mr O'Connor where he was , and not by the agent at Northampton ; and that the non-registration &c ., must also be taSen as occurring in London . The

      Judge stated , that in a late case of a bill made in one place , and notice of dishonour g iven in another , it had been held that the cause of action arose where the l ) ill was made , and not where the notice of dishonour was given . I replied that there the whole cause of action was , in effect , the debt—the bill ; the notice of dishonour being merely a result ' which was necessary for other proceedings ; while , in thia case , the non-registration was the special act which alone , and of itself , constituted the claim . I don't know whether now or then I succeeded in making myself understood : hut I fancy that I perceive a difference in the two cases , and I endeavoured to explain it . I contended that there was no nroof of the abandonment of the

      scheme—that in the " Walsttil and Spottiswoode and " Wontnert . Sharp" cases , the abandonment had been complete , and before any progress made . I relied on the mandamus and the cross-examination of Mr . Whitmarsh ' s clerk , as a proof that we were proceeding , as fast as we could . I put very strongly the fact , that the case was one which ought to be tr ied in a superior court , where judgment would have general application throughout the kingdom ; and I showed that this very question would be decided by the return of the Registr ar to the mandamus and the argument thereon . The Judge asked how this question would be raised on that argument , seeing that the money paid on shares did not aDnear in the returns to the office . In reply , I

      stated that Mr . Whitmarsh , in an argument which had already been before the court above , had relied in his affidavit upon the House of Commons report , in which these payments appear ; and that it was clear that every objection whioh that report exhibited would be raised ; for that one of the objections raised by the Attorney-General , was the connexion of the Company with the Bank—an objection which did not appear in the returns , but only in the Committee report . In confirmation , I road the Times newspaper report of the argument—particularly directing attention / to . ; the Attorney-General's " Bank" observations .. This latter seemed to have some weight with the Judge ; but he appeared most of all to be staggered by what follows : [ contended that the question of whether the

      Company had ever been a company at all , was ' now in abeyance to be decided on the mandamus argument—thai ; ifit should appear to be illegal from the holding of land—from its connexion with the Bank , or from the allotments being by ballot , ifc would then have been illegal , abinitio ; and , consequently , all " Joint Stock Company" connexion between the plaintiff and defendant—the " Director and shareholder "—connexion , by which the defendant was inferred to have received the money of the plaintiff , would cease , or rather would never have existed ; the only proof that the defendant had received the plaintiff s money , was that the defendant was a Director of a company to which the plaintiff had paid ; if the directorship were destroyed , all

      "receipt" and " agency" were destroyed , and the plaintiff and defendant bectime merely members of an ordinary partnership , and " stood each in exactly the same light towards the other . That if registration were eventually denied , the whole thing became an ordinary partnership . I referred to the judgments and remarks in the late railway cases , and particularly to the remarks in " Nockells v . Crossby . " In the cases where ifc had been decided that there was no partnership nothing had been done ; here the land had been purchased and allotted . As a partnership the case would not be cognizable in the County Court ; and if it were no partner would have—the whole money being extended generally—any special right against another .

      I also contended that the plaintiff had received part of the consideration for his money . That consideration was the chance of obtaining an allotment ; he had that chance ; he might have * ot an allotment ; Driver had ; it was the same as if the defendant had divided the whole land into the number of shares , and given to each member his £ 2 10 s . worth . Ircferred to " Hunt v . Silk , " " Beed v . Blandford . " I also relied on the lapse of time—tlio sanction by Aldorson in " Lovell v . Hicks , " of the position that lapse of time operated generally as a bar—the coal case , " Richardson v . Dunn , " also supported this . I pointed out that the ground of complaint—the ten per cent . —was not taken by the plaintiff himself , and quoted his evidence and that of Driver ; and 1 alluded to the poverty of the plaintiff , and the vast

      expense of the contest beyond what could bo allowed as costs by the court , as a proof that the action was that of others , and not that of the plaintiff . I also contended that the " ten per cent . " argument would not apply to the first £ 2 10 s ., as that was paid before the registration under the Joint Stock Companies Act was contemplated ; at that time , indeed , wo were trying to ho enrolled under the Friendly Societies Act . In reply to the ten per cent , argument generally , I contended that if the payment was illegal , the plaintiff was in pari delicto , and cited "Andrec v . Fletcher , " "Clough v . Rntcliffc , " and some others . The Judge did not consider that the in pari delicto argument applied . Ifc was Lawful for the plaintiff to pay , though unawful for defendant to receive . But he seemed to

      think that the argument might apply if it afterwards appeared , that the Company from the " Bank , " the " ballot , " or the " holding of land , " hail been illegal , ab initio . The Judge appeared from the first , and throughout , to consider the " more than ten per cent . " to be the strong part of the plaintiff ' s case ; and what most appeared to shake him was the fact that the case was already before the Queen ' s Bench ; and the argument that the agency of Munday and receipt of the money by defendant , were only proved by tno defendant being- a Director of the Company , the legality of which was now in contention ; and that thus it misfit eventually appear that the Company had never had any legal existence .

      But this ten per cent , position is much shaken by considering the strength of the argument , that the plaintiff had had what he paid his money for , and that having had it , he has no right to have his money back ; this may be put rather strongly . That he has had what he paid for , it would be difficult to deny . Ton persons employ A to purchase a hundred partridges , and they subscribe £ 1 each ; A procures the partridges , and each subscriber takes his share : the same persons subscribe the same sum for a watch ; A purchases it for them , and they decide tlie ownership by ballot . In the latter as in the former case , each subscriber has had his money's worth , and having had his money's worth , can it be contended that he may also have his money again ? " Yes , " it may be replied , " where the transaction fas in the Land case ) was contrary to law . In the

      ) 8 rtridges case there was no violation of the law . jut this distinction may be questioned . Suppose , for instance , th / it A had bought the birds ( the time of buying might be cither with or without the cognizance of the subscribers ) , a day before ( 31 st August ) they might legally be bought—would the partridge eaters have a right to their sovereigns back again ? " Owens v , Denton , " incidentally illustrates the question : there an "illegal measure" was held not to vitiate a settlement of accounts . In " Taylor v . Hare" the purchase of something that the defendant had no right to sell—a patent which did not belong to him—was not allowed to recover his money after ho had for some tinie received the benefit of the patent . The argument was not placed before the Judge so strongly-as I have here mt it , but it was alluded to several times .

      The cases as to racing sweeps and lotteries would throw some light upon the question . The cases " Jaqucs v . "Withy" and " Jaques v . Golightly , " at first sight appear to be in favour , of the plaintiff ; amlmanyotherstomuchthesame effect in "Addison on Contracts , " p . 234-5-6 . But in none of them is it clear that there was the same amount of lona fides , together with the same consent , and sanction , and delivery , and receipt of the consideration . In the judicial observations , and the reasoning of these cases , there ia much to support the view , that if the receiver of the money actually expended it for the payer ' s benefit and with bis sanction / the latter would not be sanctioned in his attempt to get his money back a » mn . " IlastelmvVJackson , " " Hodson v . Tornll , " and the other stakeholdin * caecs , in this view , support the defendant .

      In " Cundell v . Dawson , " 4 c b 376 if ™ held that the neglect to deliver « COal ' ticKct ( 1 and ? i . H « f * v ° - 3 ^ m' £ ht be Pleaded in to actwifor the pnoe-tf tho coals ; but it docs not

      Untitled Article

      „ « iiv " -tn follow from this ,: that if the £ ave rccovS his money ; tins case seems very "S ' casef ^ "' SunS another , « . Stokes and anotlerT" Tennant . Elliott , ' ; an ^^ Earmcr , Russellandanothor , " and some o ^ . f ^^ J ^ are Strongly ^ ikvour of defendant , indeed they go to the full extent of bis case . „ ^

      Untitled Article

      MONDAY , June . 11 . The June session of the above court commenced thismorning before the Right Hon the Lord Mayor the Recorder ; Aldermen Lawrence , Cardan ,,- Wr O . Marshall , and Sidney : the Sheriffs , Under-Sheriffs , and the other civil officers . « i Unlicensed Music and Dakowo BooMS .--Chajles Woolff , Richard Fridmore , and Thomas Ottey . surrendered 4 q take their trial for misdemeanoui .-M ? Ciarkson and Mr . Balkntme conducted the prosecution , and Mr . Parry was for the defence .-kr . Ciarkson , in opening the case , said that the misdemeanour imputed to the defendants was that they had kept and maintained an establishment called the Walhalla , in Leicester-square , for the purpose of public music and dancing , without a licence , and > so doing had rendereS themselves * . »« . » hi « tn tL eW » e of keeping a disordeiiy ine

      kouse , which amounted to a misdemeanour , prosecution was brought forward , nominally , » y a person named Stowell , of whom they had all probably heard , and they were no doubt aware that ho was a common informer ; but he . would ajnul ; that the real prosecutors were p ersons , ^ ™ ° ™ . °£ lieved that they wereinuredin theirownbusinessby establishments of this description , andI the > jwy would , therefore , « i « te ^«^ 2 ^ £ o 2 £ the proceeding was instituted . - !^ Recorder asked tlie learned counsel what punishment he understood to be apP ^ " * J £ * £ fence ?_ Mr . jjallantinc said he supposed the oidinTry common law punishment of fine and imprisonmiS .. « hinh was generally awarded for the oflence

      of keening a disorderly house . In the present case the object was not to inflict any punishment upon the defendants , but to obtain the opinion of the court withregard to the law .-The _ Recorder said hedi ' dnofc remember such an indictment as this having been preferred before . There had been several actions for penalties , but they had mostly failed . It was the £ 100 penalty which generally Bet informers in motion ; but here it Was alleged that the indictment was preferred solely upon public grounds . — James Peaehey , who described bimsclf as having been formerly a clothes salesman , was then examined . He stated , that he went to the Walhalla upon two occasions , and each time paid Is . for admission . The first time he went was

      on the 2 nd of January , when he saw about 150 pe rsons present- There was music and dancing going on upon both occasions . He saw Pndmore and Woolff each time . The latter was in the refreshment room and Pridmore appeared to be superintending . The words " Thomas Ottey , free vintner , " were over the door , and Pridmore ' s name was by the aide of a bed belonging to the house . Stowell was present upon one of the . occasions , and he broke some glasses , and was given In charge by Pridmore , and when the matter was investigated by the magistrate Pridmore represented himselt to be the proprietor of the establishment . —By Mr . Parry : Stowell was fined 28 s . as the value ot the glasses he had broken . Witness was paid by Stowell for attending

      the Walhalla and giving his evidence , ana he had . received £ 10 from him at different times . He had only laid three informations of this description since Christmas . In . one case two of the defendants pleaded guilty , and entered into recognisances not io commit the offence again . —Mi ' . Ua lanfcme said this was all that was required now . —The Recorder asked if any of the cases had been compromised ( —The witness said that one had been compromised . Evidence was then given to show that music and dancing went on every evening , and some questions were put by the council for the prosecution with a view to show that many of the females who were present were loose characters , but the witnesses could not speak to the fact . —The Recorder wished

      to know whether it was desired to be shown that the house was disorderly in fact , or whether ifc was merely " Disorderly" according to act of parliament . ( A laugh , )—Mr . Baliantme said he believed there was no pretence that the house was conducted in an improper manner . All they said was that the proceeding was illegal , and if his lordship entertained the same opinion , it would no doubt put a stop to It . Some evidence was then given to show that the defendant , Woolff , supplied pastry to the Walhalla , and engaged a waiter . —Mr . Drew , a clerk in the office of the clerk of the peace for Middlesex ; proved that the Walhalla had not been licensed by the magistrates as a place for public music and dancing . —The Recorder wished to know whether

      rooms or places where certain balls were held were considered to be subject to a licence ?—Mr . Ballantine said , that the Hanover-square Rooms always had a licence . —Mr . Parry said , that in the case of a dancing master , who occasionally gave public balls in his own rooms , LordEllcnborough decided that a licence was not necessary . —Mr . Ballantine said , the distinction was a place " kept" for the purpose . — This was the case for the prosecution . —The Recorder said , it appeared to him that the evidence against Wooltf and Ottey was so very slight that he did not think they ought to be called upon for their defence—Mr . Parry then addressed the jury for the defendant Pridmore ; and he contended that the evidence was not sufficient to justify them in finding

      that person guilty of keeping and maintaining the house in question . —The Recorder , in summing up , said he had felt himself called upon to decide that this place of amusement was of such a character as required a licence , and not having one it came within the definition of a disorderly house , and the only question that remained was , whether the defendant Pridmore had been proved to hive taken any share in the management of the concern . It appeared to him that the evidence to that point would have been very slight but for the artifice that had been resorted to by Stowell , the prosecutor , in breaking the glass , which had the effect of compelling the defendant to come forward and avow limself to be the owner of tlie property . If the jury

      were satisfied with such" evidence , although they might feel that the defendant had not been guilty of any moral offence , ifc would bo their duty to return a verdict of guilty , but if they considered the evidence unsatisfactory , it would be equally their duty to say that the defendant was not guilty . —Tlie jury , after deliberating for some time , . said they felt compelled to return a verdict of " Guilty ; " but at the same time stated , that although they could not help coming to the conclusion that the establishment in question came within tlio provisions of the act of Parliament , there was no ground for believing that

      it had in any way been improperly coadueteu ; and they therefore desired to recommend tlio defendant to the favourable consideration of the Court . —A verdict of " Not- Guilty , " was then recorded with regard to Ofctey and Woolff , and Pridmore was ordered to enter into his own recognisances in £ 40 , with two sureties in £ 20 each , to appear and receive the judgment of the Court , if he should be required to do so . —In another case of a similar description against a person named Botcler , Mr . Ciarkson said he should withdraw from the prosecution , and a verdict of " Not Guilty" was accordingly returned .

      WEDNESDAY , June 13 . Robbing a Clerk . —W . Arnold , aged 17 , a clerk , was indicted for stealing a half crown , three shillings , and one fourpenny piece , the property of Joseph Rudd . The jury , after a' long consultation , and retiring for some time , found the prisoner "Guilty . " —The Common Sergeaut sentenced him to six months' imprisonment . Stealing a Paib of Stays—Mary Ann Margaret Langhatn , aged 25 , described as married , was convicted of stealing a pair of stays , valued at 16 s ., the property of Mary Ann Bridgeman , a sfcaymaker

      living at Woolwich . There was also another indictment for stealing twenty handkerchiefs from another , shop in the same town , The prisoner , a respectable looking young country woman , who had an infant in her arms , handed in a written statement , in which she stated that distress had driven her to the act , and that [ an ofticer in the army was the father of her child . —In answer to the court , the officer said the prisoner was a known character . She had been apprehended with the property , on her , shortly after taking it , She was delivered of the child she then had in her arms as soon as she got to the station house . —She was sentenced to six months'

      imprisonment . THURSDAY , June H . ( Before Lord Chief Justice Wilde , Mr . Justice Patteson , and M . Baron Rolfe . )

      TRUr . OF HAMILTON , FOR FIRING AT THE Q . UEEN Their lordships took their seats this morning " at ten o ' clock . The prisoner William Hamilton , was placed in the dock a few minutes before ten , and , as a matter of course , attracted a great deal of notice ; he was described in the calendar as a bricklayer , of the age of 23 . He was dressed in a flannel jacket He is rather a good-looking man / about five feet nine inches is height , with a silly expression - of countenance . -The Attorney-General , Mi * . Wilsby f , " i £ r ' -m Bodl . ' andMr- ^ larkaP P eai ° d JtaStfJr 5 it » . r ! soaer ' t ° ™ i < K ni f . i p Guilty , " and was sentenced to be transported for the term of seven years .

      Untitled Article

      fen r ^ P ukasc i wh . ich imposes a dutv of en copecks a pound on printedbooks imported into liussm , provides that double duties shall be i aW for ail floy els and romances . ' ¦ ¦ Sir Alan ' M'Nab" has avrivod in London from Canada , and m Saturday had the honour of bS Presented to Lo . rd Grey , ( he Colonial Sctaiy

      Untitled Article

      -. CORN . « ... tave Monday . June 11 . — Our market continues v . SKup&Sth aU EngHsU gfn , but . . -, «^ have had cood arrivals of Foreign since this day sCnnight , nar-Srivofoats ; Fine English wheat sold pretty readily t £ daj-and fully as dear , and we had mow buyers of foreign at last week ' s prices . There was likewise more de . SSSa&r fresh French flom-, at is per sack ' advance . ZSbt for grinding sold fulljr as dear . In malt but little dota Beans and peaj maintained former pnees without S demand for either . Most of the Foreign oats coming Sore or less out of condition , they were t aken off very slowly hy the dealers at 6 d to Is reduction , but good frashcorn was quite as dear to-day . Foreign rye would find buyers . Linseed cakes dull sale . The current pnees asunder : —

      BRITISH . —Wheat . —Essex , Suffolk , and Kent , red , 38 s to isrditto white , 40 sto . 52 s , Lincoln , Norfolk , and lork . Bhire red 37 s to 44 s , Korthumberland and Scotch , white , ? 7 q to 41 s ditto red , 35 s to 42 s , Devonshire and Somersetshire red , - s to -s , ditto white - to -s , rye , 22 s to 24 s , barley , 2 ii to 30 s , Scotch , 24 s to 28 s , Malt ordinary , _ s to _ 8 pale 52 s to 56 s , peas , grey , new , 28 s to Sis , maple 2 Us to 33 s white , 24 s to 26 s , boilers ( new ) , 28 s to 80 s , beans , large , new 23 s to 26 s , ticks 24 s to 27 s , harrow , 26 s to 29 s , pigeon , 28 sto 32 s , oats , Lincoln and Yorkshire , feed , 16 s tolas , ditto Poland , and potato , 18 s to 21 s , Berwick and Scotch , 18 s to 22 s , Scotch feed , 17 s to 20 s , Irish feed , and black , 15 s to 18 s , ditto potato , 17 s to 22 s , linseed ( sowing ) 50 s to 52 s , rapeseed , Essex , new , £ 2 G to £ 28 per last , carrawav seed , Essex , new , 25 s to 29 s per cwt , rape cake , £ 4 : to £ 4 10 a per ton , Unseed , £ 9 10 s to £ 10 10 s per 1 , 000 , flour per sack of 2801 bs . ship , 31 s to 32 s , town , 40 s to 42 s .

      Foueign . — Wheat , — DanUig , 46 s to 52 s , Anhalt and Mai ' kS , 40 S to 48 s , ditto white , i 4 sto 4 Ss , Pomeranian red , 40 s to 44 s , Rostock 42 s to 48 s , Danish , Holstein , and Friesland , 36 s to 42 s , Petersburgh , Archangel , and Riga , 36 s to 40 s , Polish Odessa , 30 s to 41 s , Marianopoli , and Berdianski , 35 s to 38 s , Taganrog , 34 s to 38 s , Brabant and French , 38 s to 42 s , ditto white , 40 s to 44 s , Salonica , 33 s tft 36 s , Egyptian , 24 s to 2 Gs , rye , 21 s to 24 s , barley , Wismar andHostoek , 18 s to 22 s , Danish , ' 20 s to 23 s , Saal , 22 s to 26 s , East Friesland , 17 s to 19 s , Egyptian , 16 s to 17 s , Danube , 16 s to 17 s , peas , white , 24 s to 26 s , new boilers , 26 s to 28 s , beans , horse , 25 s to 26 s , pigeon , 30 s to 32 s , ' Egyptian , 21 s to 23 s , oats , Groningen , Danish , Bremen , and Friesland , feed and black , 12 s to 15 s , ditto , thick and brew , 15 s to 19 s , Riga , Petersburg , Archangel , and Swedish , 13 s to 16 s , flour , United States , - per 1961 bs ., - 21 s to 23 s , Hamburg 21 s to 22 s , JDantzijy and Stettin , 21 s to 23 s , French per 2801 bs ., 32 s to 34 s .

      Wednesday , June , 13 . —With Foreign oats we continue to be well supplied , whilst of all other grain , particularly wheat , tlie supply is very limited ; but the , weather being on the whole favourable for the growing crops , the trade in . every article is vevy quiet—the demand being confined to immediate consumption . Arrivals this week : —Wheat—English , 1 , 320 quarters ; foreign , ' 2 , 530 quarters . Barley—English , 40 quarters ; foreign , 8 , 100 quarters . Oats—English , 2 , 930 . quarters ; foreign , 8 , 160 quarters . Flour—English , 1 , 710 sacks .

      BREAD . The prices of wheaten bread in the metropolis are from SJd to 7 £ d ; of household ditto , 5 Jd to Gd per 4 tt > s loaf .

      CATTLE . Shithfield , June 8 . —There was a large supply of beasts ; trade was dull , and it was with great difficulty that Monday ' s quotations were realised . The number of sheep and , lambs was very large j the quaUty of the supply was , however , but middling ; tke choicest kinds were consequently disposed of at a small reduction , but second-rate were much lower . There was an extraordinary supply of calves ; a large proportion of them were inferior ; a choice one , therefore , made 4 s ., but other kinds suffered a considerable re » duction in price , and manj remain unsold . Smithpield , Monday , June 11 th . —The arrivals of foreign stock at the various outports have been small . From Ire . land , 127 beasts , and 152 sheep have come to handby sea

      , , for our market . Fresh up this morning , tlie receipts of home-fed beasts were seasonably extensive , and of full average quality . The attendance of buyers was small ; yet , as the weather was favourable for slaughtering , the beef trade was steady , at prices fully equal to those obtained on Monday last . The general top quotations for beef was 3 s 8 d per 81 bs . la extreme cases rather more was paid . With all breeds of slieep we were fairly supplied . Generally speaking , the mutton trade was in a very sluggish state at barely last week ' s quotations , and at which a total clearance was not effected . The number of lambs was large ; while the demand for that description of stock was heavy at adecline in value of quite 2 d per 81 bs , Calves—the supply of which was good—sold slowly at the late decline in value . The sale for pigs was heavy at barely late rates .

      Head of Cattie at Sjiithfieij ) . Beasts .. .. 3 , 30 ( i I Calves .. .. 290-Sheep .. .. 29 , 611 ) | Pigs 25 * Price per stone of 81 bs . ( sinking the offal ) . Beef .. 2 s 4 d to 3 s 8 d I Veal .. 3 s 2 d to 4 s 04 Mutton .. . 3 s 4 d .. 4 s Od | Pork .. 3 2 .. 4 2 Lamb .. .. 4 s 8 d to 5 s lOd . Per Slbs . by the carcase , Newgate and Leademiall , Monday , June 11 . —Inferior beef , 2 s 2 d to 2 s 4 d ; middling ditto , 2 s 6 d to 2 s 8 d : prime large , 2 s 19 d to 3 s Od ; prime small , 3 s Od to 3 s 2 d large pork , 3 s 2 d to 3 s fid ; inferior mutton , 3 s Od to 3 s 2 d ; middling ditto , 3 s 4 dto 3 s Gd ; prime ditto , 3 s 8 dto 3 s lOd veal , 3 s Udto 3 s-lQd ; small pork , 3 s 8 d to 4 s Od : lainul 4 s 8 d to os l » d . . '

      PROVISIONS . London , Monday , Juno 11 . —With no activity in markets , we have scarcely anything new to report Of butter , nothing worth notice was done in Irish landed last week and prices ruled low . Limerick , 04 s ; Waterford , G 3 s to liG

      English Butter , June ll . -Our trade continues dull , at previous rates ; but this day a disposition is shown-to prevent prices gozng lower . The quantity of our butter being now more regular , there is not so wiue a range in price . Dorset fine weekly 7 Cs to SOs per cwt ; ditto uiidkur , 60 s to 70 s ; Devon ditto , 60 s to 70 s ; fresh Buckinghamshire 8 s to Ids per dozen ; ditto West Countrv , Gs to SiT !> mit >

      TRVU AND VEGETABLES . Coyest . Gaivdei , Monday , June 11 . -Asparamis Is Cd to os per bundle ; strawberries Gd to Is per small pottle peaches 40 s per dozen ; cucumbers Sd to 3 s per brace green peas Is (< d to 2 s Cd , . green currants us to Gs , -we ' berries 2 s Gd to 8 s , old onions 4 s to 5 s , and spinach 4 d to Gd per half sieve ; Summer eabbajws , C . I to Is , and horseradish Is Gd to ! 2 s Gd per dozen heads ; Spring turnips 2 s to 3 s , carrpls os to 6 s , old carrots 3 s to 4 s , Spring onions Is to 2 s , tu-mp radishes Sd to Ud , and greens 2 s to 2 s ( Jd per dozen bunches ; pine apples 5 s to 7 s ; hothouse "rapes 7 s to 8 s , and new potatoes 2 d to fid per Ib ; orai ^ cs Cs to 14 s , lemons os to !) s , and forced French beans Is 6 d to 2 s Gdper hundred ; mushrooms 9 d to Is per punnet rhubarb 4 d to ( id per dozen bundles ; cos lettuces Cd to lUd per score ; cauliflowers , 3 s to 5 s per dozen head < =

      POTATOES . SotrrmyARK Waterside , June 11 . —The supply of Enelish potatoes is all but finished , and those from the continent are so few that it will not be worth while to give anv re port af ter tins until the next season . The following are this day's prices :- \ orltslnre Regents , 120 s to 200 s Suoteh . whites , SOs to DOs ; foreign , 50 s to 90 s u "" > - "" -ij .

      COLONIAL PRODUCE . ' Imxdos , Tuesday June 12 . —The quantity of sucav offered m public sale to-day , say 400 hhds wZt r « l , 14 , 000 bags Mauritius , and 0 , 000 fog Befit exceeded S demand ; and although theiinportm bought in fullym third to sustain the market , yet prices dedinod Jm t » ,,. badoes sold Sto Cd to 43 s G < i ? & yefZ ^ s Voi ^ f Bengal white Benares , 40 s to 43 s ; crystallised 43 s to 4 oV JS , Ti . T ™ i ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ * * » w . 'n « W ^ 420 hluls , including the public sale . The refined market lumpS ! 52 s d to 53 s " u qUOfatiyUS ^ «*""* <*¦ ^ evy COFH 5 E .-A . further advance upon yesterday ' s prices of Ceylon has been freely paid in public sale toilay , makinc is advance upon the public prices of last week ; about Iwvl S > ° w ? , Taiy ? ° ? "binary native , sold 33 s t « 3 . 3 s Od , a tew lots 34 s , and about 1 , 500 bags arc reported sold by private contract , 33 s to 33 s Gd H

      COAL London-, Holiday , Juno 11 . —The monthly return of the coal meter's office shows that the total quant tv of coals and coke delivered in May was 277 , 884 tons " ' 09 704 tons were delivered by official meters , and G 8130 tons bvnriv ^ e SS 8 ^^ eff ° - > - lately ^ en S nKide todo aw ^ ith ^ SMhWS ^? , fi 5 t J So ^ nelo ^^ S © 3 » S ^ -a * 5 ffi u [ . «? f , " , , ^ " t ! l e close of the market . ) East Ada ' i ^ M ( » ^' W ^ Ml * Westllavtley 14 s ; . tast Auair s Alain , 12 s ; lln ^ tiivs lPirHov i-4 c ivi . n i welUIain . Us : New TaWldTit It K , 1 wl ° i "

      " Wt olWIS fl ^ V' ^ i Afield Moo , v , w - ? , - ^ anneM Moor Uutes , 12 s Gd ; Townlev mmmmm Iletton , ics sa ; Ilaswell , ids Gd Hutto i l \ t

      WOOL . SWfi A ' tan tov Y » tk- T 1 » $ S ;« SS tS ^ , ^ - -st sss ^ SHB&SSS SWir 1 ^ 01 ' ' ' ^ " « » ^ 7 i VV Into Highland do . - .. .. 9 G 10 0 Laid Crossed do ., unwashed .. 8 9 10 6 Bo . do ., washed 9 y j ? | iJo . j lieviot do ., unwashed .. UC i » 0 Do-, do washed 13 c 17 0 White Cheviot do . do . .. .. 20 0 22 ( i Imports for the week .. .. 24 hags . Vreviously this year .. .. 3 , SU bags , foreign , —Tlie trade being well supplied at the late pub ho sale here ( London ) , there is little doing by private con tract . Imports for the week .. .. 18 bales . Previously this year ,. .. 23 , 263 bales .

      Untitled Article

      m ine parisn ot sat . Anne , Westuiiuster , at the Printing , office , 16 , _ Great ¦ Windmill-street , Ilayniarket , in the City of Westminster , for the I ' roprictor , FE AR 6 US 0 'C OXX « Jfc Esq . M . P . , and published by the said \ Vhxia . m Unset , a 4 the Office , in tlie same stve « t and parish . —Saturday . June 16 th , J 841 > .

      Untitled Article

      POUXDERBfG OF MOBS EMIGRANT SHIPS . ONE HUXDRED LIVES LOST . Advices receked on Tuesday from Quebec state that at midni g ki on the lOiJi of last month , the JfarK from Linieriek , an old vessel , manned by a crewef ten bands , with 111 pas ^ ngers , when within fifty miles from St . Paul's , ran into an iceberg with terrific fwrce . Tlie vrjiole of her bows -were stove in , and the next moment ihe sea was yushing into the lold with ihe violence almost of a cataract . A piercing sliriok -was heard from below , but it was only of a few Moments deration , as the ship went down almost immediately . It was the mate ' s watch , who , with oaesesmnn and * cabin boy , succeeded in savin ? three lives bv one of ibe boats which floated

      from tho -wreekjas she foundered . About twenty of the passengers managed to rea ^ h the deek just before she * went down , some of whom jumped on to the ice , while othsrs clung to the floating spars . Uine only , hGwever , could be preserved , six men , two women , « nd a boy , who iad got on to the ice . 3 fbttoDg "ffas seen of the master or the rest of the crew ; they all per ished with the remainder of tne passengers . Exposed " in the boat to the most inclement weather , the helpless survivors remained the whole of the following day . Eventually a larnuo , named thoiBoslin Castle , and the Falcon , a Irig , approached and took them on board .. The poor creatures liad suffered severely from the cold ,

      'Central €Iunnwrt &Lt;£Ottrt.

      ' Central € iunnwrt < £ ottrt .

      Mamtii «*• ¦ ¦ . - ¦

      mamtii «*• ¦ ¦ . - ¦

      Untitled Article

      . : -..:., . ^ -. ; " ;/ -- ' . . June 16 , 1849 , ; s ^ ^ v .: ^ d ^ r . ^ M- . '' srl ' n . r . ... r ¦ . '¦¦¦¦¦¦ " ¦¦ - - ' * ¦ i ~ === ^

      Printed By William Rider, Of No. 5, Macclosfield-Street ;

      Printed by WILLIAM RIDER , of No . 5 , Macclosfield-street ;

  • Citation
    • Northern Star (1837-1852), June 16, 1849, page 8, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/ns/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1526/page/8/