IMPORTANT NEWS FROM ENGLAND. [From the Sydney Sentinel, Dec.-3.]

New Zealander, Volume 1, Issue 30, 27 December 1845, Page 4

IMPORTANT NEWS FROM ENGLAND. [From the Sydney Sentinel, Dec.-3.]

By the barque Hamlet which arrived on Sunday, we are in receipt of English papers to the sth of August, which, although not of so late a date as those previously received via India, contain one piece of intelligence of paramount' importance : to the interests of the Colony. It is that, owing to the zealous opposition of the few sincere friends and advocates Australia has on the other side of the Pacific, the proposed Sqatting Act, so dreaded by the pastoral lords ot the soil inyJie far i terior, has not been passed in its con ten. plated form, but u postponed, until next session of Parliament, to afford time for ascei taining the [ public opinion of the colonists generally on the j policy or expediency of the measure. When the ! Bill was brought into the Commons, finding that | it was likely to t»e resisted, the ministry gave up the measure, except that clause which relates to unfoitunate Van Diemen « Land, so that the Bill was passed with that one clause only, and on the | 4th August it received the ro\al a»sent. '1 he avowed ol.ject of the. Act as it now stands is to I devote the Land fund of Tasmania to the payment of convict expensei. Theunjnj^duiited-layg^^iwntit^Lup^rda.. -orsri7^ooJ)alfs of wool from these pciloiiies was disposed of at the last wool sales without any decrease-in prices* They consisted of 9,966 Bales Australian 8,793 „ Port Phillip 7,272 „ Van Diemen's Land i 1,887 „ South Australia 3,201 „ Southern African ' 11 „ New Zealand 1 31,130

The«e sales, we are happy (o say; were announced under peculiar favourable circumstances, the demnnd continuing very brisk in the manufacturing districts and there being a cheering prospect of an abundant harvest at .the time. The Port Phillip samples, being of a superior quality, were eagerly sought after. The burr was more prevalent in the Sydney samples than at the previous sales in Ma> j huitlfc Tastnanian wool, being in a clammy condition, sold at a shade lower than either. ( - "' • In the House of Commons bnMpnday the 28th July, on the motion that' £'&'M;^bt* granted to Her Majesty to defray the civil expenses of South Australia. - - ' Mr* Hindley observed that it was understood that the money received from the sale of land in South Australia, was to be applied to the promotion of emigration. The Government had retained i 56,000 which had been received from land sales, to meet the expense of erecting public I buildings, and he wanted to know whether they intended to apply any portion of that sum to the promotion of emigration f Mr. G. W. Hope observed, that it was a matter of agreement that a portion of the money so realized should be applied to Government purposes if necessary. . The motion was then agreed to. £5,829 to defray the charge for the settlement at Port Kssinfrton was agreed tg^ j£7,*Bg to defray the expenses of the Falkland |*Jahtis being put, was also agreed to. j The Queen and lloyal Family were still at Otborne House. The King of Holland was still sojourning in England. The Queen through the Duke oi Wellington, had appointed His Majesty a Field Marshal in the British Army. Tut? weather has been unusually cold in England in August, partaking more of the chard teristicsof November than tlie beginning of autumn. . The latest news from America is of importance being intelligence of the positive annexation of Texas to the United States Umou, ami of the consequent refusal by Texas of the terms of reconciliation held out by the Government of Mexico. <

Important' to AucTiovttßS.— "Court of Ex chequer. —RoUtis v. Burke and another. Mr Jems and Mr. O^leweie counsel for the tlaiiitiff; Mr. Cockbuni and Mr. Bovill for the defendants. The plaintiffis Mr. George Robins, the celebrated auctioneer, and this was an action in which he claimed the sum of £054, being the amount of commission alledged to be due to him from the defendants as the vendors of an estate in Bucks, which they had placed in his hands in Ma), 1841. On the part of the defendants the sum of £300 was paid into court ; and the question now to be decided was whether the plain - tilt" was "milled to any thing beyond that sum. It appears that the defendants are the trustees under the will of a Mr. Grath, who died possessed of a considerable estate in the county of Buck*. Being directed to sell the property, the defendants offered it to the Duke ol Buckingham for £Go 000, but without effect, as his grace having had the estalesuiveved.didnot feel inclined to give more than £51.000 for it. Before this the plaintiff was applied to by the defendants to know on what terms he would undertake to "knock down" the property. The plaintiff replied, that he iihould expect 20 guineas for preliminary expenses and one per cent, commission Jfor an actual sale^hut thai-m-lim event of- tue properly Being bought in, he should only claim 50 guineas, and all disbursements, these latter being included, of course, in the one per cent, commission on a tale These terms were assented to, and the plaintiff took his measures to dispose of the estate on the 31st of August. Before that da>, the defendants renewed their treaty with the Duke, who, on the 30th concluded it by becoming the purchaser at the price originally named by the tuistees. Tins took place without the privity of the 'plaintiff, who when acquainted w ith the mat tu*, put in bis claim to the one per cent, commission, and now called several eminent auctioneers on his behalf to prove that by the custom of the trade the full amount was payable under the circumstances of the case. On the part of the defendants, the Duke of Buckingham was called to prove that he had not bought the estate through the plaintiffs in* lervention, and that be had not been influenced by bis advertisements to accede to the terms proposed by the defendants, the fact being that his inducement to purchase the estate arose from its proximity to other lands belonging to him in the same county. The Chief Baron, at the close of plaintiff's repl.t, summed up the case to the juiy, leaving it to them to say w nether, although the plaintiff might have had nothing to do with the actual sale to tae Duke of Buckingham, he wat» not fairly entitled to his full commission on the purchase money paid by his Grace, as though he had "knocked down the estate" to him Tue Jury returned a verdici for the plaintiff .-foFthe" full amount claimed. — Times, July 7.