The Express. — London, England, 1851-11-26 00:00:00

Zbe eourt. OSBORNE, Tvasnax. Her :Majesty, Prince Albert, and the Royal Family took their usual exercise in the grounds at Osborne, yes terday. Mr. John C. King, from the Colony of Victoria, had an interview with Earl Grey, yesterday, at the Colonial once. Mr. John Wood, Chairman of the Board of Inland Re venue, had an interview with the Chancellor of the Ex chequer yesterday. Lord Montcagle had alwi an interview with the Hight lion. Gentleman, at his official residence in Downing-street. Despatches were received yesterday, at the Colonial dice, from the Governor of the Falkland Islands. (Prom last sight's Gaelic) HORSE-GUARDS, Nov. 24.—General Order : Her Majesty does not regaire that the Of lcers of the Army should wear any other Mourning, on the present melan choly occasion of the death of yield-Marshal his late Ma jesty the King of Hanover, than a black crape round the ' left arm, with their uoiforms—B7 eon= and of Field- Karehal the Duke of Wellington, Lomonuider-in-Chief.-- G. Baows, Adjutant-General. ADMIRALTY, Nor. 21.—Her Majesty does not re quire that the Officers of the Fleet or Marines should wear say other Mourning, on the present melancholy occasion of the death of his late Majesty the King of Hanover, than a black crape round the left arm, with their uniforms.— J. P . ADMIRALTY, Nov. 2..—The Queen has been gra: eionsly pleased to appoint Colonel Charles Menzies, Royal Marines, and Lieutenant-Colonel 1 homes Wearing, Boyal Marines, to be .tides-de-Camp to her Majesty. FOREIGN-01'110E, Nov. 22.—The Queen has been groioustly pleased to appoint Lieutenant-Colonel Henry Crowieke Itawlinson, C. 8., now her Majesty's Consul at B ad, to be her Majesty's Consul -General at that city. a d, Nov. 25.—The Queen has been pitond to appoint Lieutenant-Colonel liohert Henry Wyn yard, Companion of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath, to be Licutenoot•Governor of the province of New Ulster, in New Zeeland. Her Majesty has also been plowed to appoint Captain Edward Ironic, of the corps of Royal Engineers, to be Collector of Cotoena for the Island of Trinidad. ME NI %WAGE OF TILE EARL 01 , LANESEIOROUGH with Fred, ries Emma, re.ict of the late Sir Richard Hunter, of Delany House, Susves, was solemnised on Mon day at St. George'. Church, Hanover-square, hi the pre sence of a whet tittle of the friend.; of both families. The ceremony Mac performed by . the Rev. Freeman 11. Bishop, brother of the bride, &mutant minister of Grosvenor Chapel, and domestic chaplain to the noble bridegroom. Shortly after leaving the church the noble earl and countess took th e ir deportee. tor Leamington. en route fin Swab- land Hall, the family seat in Leicestershirc. A sumptuene, repast wa. provided at the town mansion in Great Stan hope...treat, of which a select party of relations and friends partook after the ceremony. THE FATAL COLLISION ON THE LONDON AND NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY. THE INQUE3T,. WEEDON, Nov. 2.5. To-day, at one o'clock, Mr. Peter Edward hicks, coroner for the district of Northampton, held his court at the Globe Inn, to inquire into the death of Mr. James Currie, aged years, • market gardener and nurseryman, lately residing at Upper Claptou. The jury having been 81101r11, proceisled to view the body of the deceased. The body having been identified, Mr. Charles Livock, station-master at Weedon, said, it is my duty to attend to the dispatch of an train. stopping at that station. On Saturday afternoon the cattle train arrived' at Weeilun at 10 minutes after 3 o'clock, and stopped, in consequence of the engine being unable to take it on. As soon as 1 heard this I telegraphed back to Rugby for another engine, which arrived in due course, but before that engine arrived, a coal-train came up from Rugby; • very few minutesafter a the'M arket Ilarborough train.sl ined tately the new engine arrived it was attached, and the Market Ilarborough train proceeded on its journey. I then brought the coal train up to the top points, on the south aide of the station, and was in the act of shunting this train from the up to the down line when the collision took place. The signals to atop had all been duly exhibit d. The dis tante from the main signal-post to the tail of the passenger train was about 300 yards. There is an additional ►ignal, galled the 11 , 11i11:11 . , signal, which the policeman at the main signal has the management of by 111(.4115 of a wire, and he tan turn it off or on while he is at the main sipwl. 'f he distance between the signals is 467 yards. Coroner—What is the duty of a station-master with regard to the starting of trains? Witness—lt' a train leaving a station be • heavy goods train, a station -master would not • e jaw , tilled in starting another train in less than ten minutes. But if the first train were a light passenger one, another might follow in live minutes. Much is left to the diseretion of the station.master in this matter. As • general rule passenger trains are to take precedence of lug gage trains, and goods trains must not be started from any station when passenger trains are due. This regulation, however, is subject to modifications agreeably to the circum. stances of the trains, the state of the weather, the weight of the load, and the character of the engine. You will thus sec that considerable discretion is left to station masters. The engine-driver of • luggage train has also positive instructions not to approach • station at a spsrd esceeding t. a miles en hour, and he is directed, when within a quarter of Is mile of the station, to blow his whistle twice, as • signal to the braltesman to put on his brake. We never allow one train to fol low another closely without giving due precautions to the engine-man. We give him the time the preceding train left, and tell him to he cautious bow he proceed.. The cattle train, which arrived at Weedon at 40 min. past 3, was much later than usual on Saturday. It does not stop at Weedon except to take in water. The usual tune of the train passing Weedou is half-past 12. The 4 p.m. passen ger train from Rugby, was • few minutes late on Saturday. la came into the station at 37 minutes past 4, the proper time being 4.45 p.m. It had been outside the station some few minutes owning to the stoppage of the other trains. I do not know bow many persons were injured, but as far as I can judge, there were sixteen or seventeen who had braises and eats. It was about • quar ter past three when I telegraphed to Rugby fur an engine for the Market Harborough train. Thu average time for a cattle-train to some from Rugby to Weedon is about three-quarter of an hear. We have no siding at Weedon for trains, only a small slip for carriages and waggons to be attached detached. By Mr. Martin, • solicitor of London, prevent on behalf of deceased's relatives : Thirty passenger trains pass Weedon daily, out of which 10 down and 12 tip trains stop at the station, and there are also about 13 luggage trains each way during the day and night. This is irrespective of any special trains. Sme of the Iste trains stop at Weeding, and some do not. If we had • siding at Weedon, and anything were to happen to a train we could place it there out of daager ; but we have no siding. The cattle train which ran into the pas wager train, was a special train from Rugby to Thrap- Men. We knew it was owing. It was 'swelled on the coal train, and also on the 4 p.m. passenger train from Rugby, by a signal board attached to the cad of the train. The witness was subjected to a further croer-examination by Mr. Martin, with a view to show that the quantity of train at the Weedon station, ea Saturday, woe far too many, and that the accident had the arises. The witness denied this, and expressed his Weise that had ordinary we been exhibited on the part of the driver of the last up train no calamity would have happened—By Mr. Hayes, Waiter of the company: The previous passenger train peed the Weeslos statism at three o'clock. The next train would be due at 6.13 p.m. So that although we have twesty-two trains daily passing Weedon station we have only one between 3 p.m. sad 0.16 p.m.—Mr. Hayes (to the coroner) : I put thaw questions in because the witness has been subjected to • erowexamination, apparently with • view to show that the hoe was choked up with trains. —Cower : We have it is evidence that there were throe trains at the station when the accident oteurred.—Mr. Mayes: Ti., that is true; bat the accident was quite inde pendent of them. To the Witness: Presuming that the proper signals were up, If the driver of the extra cattle train had paid attention to toss, do you think the acci dent could have happened?—Witness: Certainly not. I &Maid have no fear of allowing • train to femme where the 4 p.m. passenger train stood a whole day with the * pals on as they were. It is a thing that frequently occurs. The distance from where you get the first sight of thewxiliary signal and the end of the train that was run Into was 1,060 yards. Charles l'assoes, guard to the train leaving Thyley on Saturday last, at 4.23 p.m., said—We were stopped by sig nal below the station punctually at the time we were due. • east train was at the station, sad as that drew out we moved is. We had not need still mere than half • minute Thee a stde train caw Wein into es. The signals to Mop at the auxiliary station were pot up, whoa the settle • ism es well as when our train passed. I event peel. duly date the distance whisk this *sal is from the sta des. I think it is 500 yards. It is sellebout to enable • • jail up. I did not see the cattle train used it was midi slat a carriage length from my ms. I then thez.est. I knew that an extra cattle train was Slim .l it at the Rugby station before we leR, swig ear train bore a red board at the end le show ills teg and others on duty tact an extra train was I* W • Campbell, the guard who had charge of the Vein in whisk deemed we travelling, said: Mr. Carrier was • sessmaeisse paem i eger and rode n the second compartment of the anis. nest to the engine, the beggar van only brig between thew We arrived at leery at 3.44 p.m. We were doe then 3.80 p.a We are affseled 10 minutes at Rugby, and we left that station about ens minute after 4 o'clock. We weed outside the Wades aides at 4.25 pa. Had the read been claw we shall have arrived at the stetlen i dui dine. In masegnease et die ins being Masked we stopped entitle. Our train hod • sigma ea in that an extra . train weld follow. Ineiresdeas to that were not given to me; they would 111•11•117 bs givens' die let guard—l wee the get. Mr. Omer R. Calbeek, of the Laserpnrsis Laming reliessiste sell—l wee en the' Wafts platers en Br shiesess when the esillies ocommed. I wee he the Leasiegtee leers Weis. When I snivel at the pima= I sew the ilateattle train tan. 1 did not knew that the engine se that train was disabled, bet I hoed ems of the drives remaking jocularly something alma a " terkettle =gine." I saw the coal train follow, 'ad diem the gamma train. exactly as the guard had de- scribed. The cattle train was out of sight when the acci dent occurred. The coal train might have been in motion, but it was moving very slowly. Medical evidence as to the cause of death having been given, George Bower, a policeman in the employ of the London and North Western Company, said : I was fireman of an en gine convoying some cattle from Rugby to Thrapston, on Saturday afternoon. We had 16 cattle trucks attached, and the brake van made 17. The cattle trucks were all idi. Ido not know exactly what time we left Rugby. I dm not carry a watch, the engine driver does. We did not Mop at any place between Rugby and Weedon station. I ma sure I cannot tell you at what rate we were going, one how long we were coming from Rugby to Weedon. We did not slacken speed anywhere until we reached the As kew-bridge, about a mile from the Weedon station. The driver then shut the regulator. That was before we saw the signal. When we saw the signal the driver whistled for the brakesman to put on his brake, and I put on the tender brake at the seine time. This did not appear to slacken our speed any, or very little. As soon as we found our speed was not slack ened, and when we saw the men signal on, the driver di- ectly reversed his engine. This slackened the train • little, but just as we got to the main signal poet, the engine' Sew into forward gear, and the train went on at full speed again. The regulator was now open, anal the driver could nut shut it again. This prevented the train being stopped. Coroner—What was the cause of the engine going out of gear? Witness—l don't know. The engine -driver examined the engine before he started on Saturday, and so did the foreman of the locomotive department. I have worked with the same engine before and consider she was in good working condition on Saturday as far as I know. Coroner—Do you usually travel with cattle trains at the rate of 2.5 miles an hour . Witness-1 am sure I don't know whether there is any specified time for special cattle trains. I believe all cattle trains ore timed for about 22 or 23 miles an hour. By Mr. Haves—The regulator was shut at the ';Askew -bridge by Brockhale and Pinney. There are notches into which the reversing lever is put to keep her from running out of gear. I believe that notch was in order. The driver kept has hand on the handle. He opened the regulator and then the tackle Hew into forward gear, the handle flying out of his hand. I have tried this myself, and frequently found the same result; the handle being knocked out of my hand. This happens generally every trip; and I always keep a small piece of suck to assist me in keeping the tackle in props gear. The signals into Weedon station were all on, denoting caution. We saw them distinctly as we approached. We joined the train at Rugby. The number of our engine was 67. I have b een on he r bef o re, and have never known the reversing gear to fly out so that we could not bring it back into its former place. Thomas Robinson examined—l am a brakeman in the employ of the London anal Nortn-Western Railway Company, and was engaged in the train front Rugby to Terapston. We had 16 cattle waggons attached aml the brake made 17. The waggons were all full or cattle. I don't know the weight of the train. We left Rugby at 4.10 p.m., and when the train came to a stand at Weedon I looked at my time-piece and found that it was 4.39 p.m. I think we travelled at about 25 miles at, hour. The driver shut off the steam at the Askew bridge; that is before we come in sight of the signals. I don't remember the speed having been slackened in passing the Crick Station. 1 saw a passenger train, that front Rugby, before we left. It was, I think, about 9 or 10 minutes before we started.—Coroner . It is, I scPPose, your duty to obey the driver's signal, and put on the brake ? Witness : It is my duty to look out for the auxiliary signal, and, if the green light is on, then the real, or danger signal, is seen to be on at the station.— Coroner: Was the green light on at the auxiliary pos t when you approached the station on Saturday ?—‘ k nees : It was.—Coroner: What did you do ?—Witness : As soon as I saw it I put on my brake, and at the awe moment the driver blew his whistle twice to warn me to do so.—Coroner: Did this 'Lawn the speed of the I train? Witness: Yes, it did slightly.—Coroner: In what state were the rails? Witness: Rather greasy, I think.—' Coroner: I suppose you cannot see what the driver does to' his engine where you are ? Witness : No, but I can see whether the steam is shut off by looking at the chimney of the engine. I saw it was shut off after we passed the Askew bridge.—Coroner: Can you ascertain when the driver re verses his engine ? Witness : Yes, we can feel the motion when the engine is reversed.—Coroner: Did you feel this motion on Saturday ? Witness : 1 did not, and be tween the auxiliary and the main signal post the train started afresh. After we came to a stand still, I went hack to protect the line, and afterwards proceeded with my train to Blisworth. I did not see our engine examined.— I kept my break on all the way front the Askew bridge up to the time of the collision. Before we came to the Askew bridge we were travelling, I should say, at about 25 miles an hour. After we got through it, 1 found that the train was going at such a speed that the driver could not possibly atop at the station. I have a copy of the rules supplied to all servants of the comany. itule 2- is as follows : n Engines running alone, or taking luggage or empty wag gons, must not exceed the speed of ti miles an hour, without distinct orders in each ease, or some urgent necessity." Mr. Mayes—Well, were you sot aware of this rule ? The witness made no answer. The Coroner said it had been sworn that the extra cattle train left Rugby at 4.10 p.m., and that it had arrived at Weldon at 4.39 p.m. The distance was 131 mike, and, if the time was correct, the rate of travelling must have been considerably greater than 26 miles an hour, taking into consideration the getting up and sacking the ;peed. William Gordon, a policeman ia the employ of the London and North Western Company, said—l remember the engine of a cattle train breaking down on Saturday afternoon. I put on the up signal to prevent other trains running in at Weecon station. Kept it on until after the cattle train ran into the passenger train. I could see from my position about 200 yards in the direction of Rugby. I saw the cattle train come in. I was at that time about 230 yards back from my signal, and could, from where I stood, see the auxiliary signal, which is about 200 yards lower down, nearer Rugby. I should say that the cattle train was coming about five or six miles an hour from the auxiliary signal. I think the brakes were on. The rails were not very slippery. The passenger trains had been at the station about fourteen minutes when the cattle train ran into her. I was at my signed post at the time the passenger train arrived, and I did not note the exact time. Coroner—l have no more witnesses on my list. Is any one else in attendance ? . . Mr. Bedford, the chief of the company's police, said the driver of the engine was in attendance. The Coroner thought it better not to call him at present. Ile should require some evidence as to the state of the engine, and also as to the starting of the trains from Rugby, and as it would be impossible to close the inquiry that night, it would be, perhaps, better to adjourn at once until k riday next. Another of the sufferers is in a very dangerous state, and fears are entertained that he will not recover. This is the labourer who sustained such severe injuries on the legs and thighs. Captain Huish and Captain Bruyeres are both very se• verely shaken, and neither of them were able to attend the inquiry. Colonel the Hon. Douglas Pennant, with his wife, Lady Louisa Pennant, were travelling in their own carriage on the train to which the accident occurred. The gallant colonel had several of his front teeth loosened; and Lady Louisa, who is in an interesting situation, has suffered meet severely from the shock. Their servant, it is hoped, is gra. dually recovering. INQUEST ON ME. FlNNZLLY.—Yestertiay, an in quest was held before Mr. Wale', MT., on the body of William Fumelly, Esq., at the chambers of the deceased gestiemen. Old-square, Linooln'oinn. Deceased was fifty twoßset age, and was to for many years connected with the per. He was called the bar in 1827 , end was see er editors of " Clarke and Fionelly's Cases in the Ham d Lords." The jury, composed of members of Liasekhoism bac* viewed the body, Olive Humphries, Sark= le theength stated that on going into his sitting roam en eerier morainic about 8 o'clock, she found him I the /ter in his night clothes, and apparently dead. he galled in medical aid, but life was found to be Mine. has donned bad declined in health and goggles* nue deremed. He bad eraffered much from to tbm! sorrows. Oa a visit to Brighton is illooledilessleina %and had perfectly re covered. Re had Agri at the Began Club on the evening hela ids thesse.—Mr. Daum argent, stated that he Meads& deemed for the Ilegt time on bis Musa from atightea • k Ocighte hat, whoa he sposered to asted witk sympto Meg es attack ef niaes, t gni will math memusssem wasmnt ofal irritants. He bad gonad le visit lessened it time weeks, when be was called he as Ilawelay_awatiag, alma id Vidoek, sad fond Mr. Ifemils dead. esuansnago was =*mid, as if he had died Meet a gisogglo. He sole apseggeween manisitlea ef the body, sad found be bed died Om rapture slam if the mall Intl*. tines. There was sot the slightest mem for attributing death to say other mess. Thsjmy tstsesed a verdict se " Natural Death." is the egagee - ef the imairy Mr. tier leant Miller, a Mead of lie desavad gmtinna, stated that so will had boas lend la lie ehmesse, and that them was set a Mile relative of the iieseend he Wm. Bat it was understood that gem of bis enstiege milk& k I. whom the walaseboty eggemenes wand be made knows. FAME FALL TEAM • SCAFFOLD.—LEA Mr. Payne held an inquest at Guy's ilespital, cm i tt lial ay of George Terry, a master bricklayer, reelftg at Neldar hill, Midhuret, Suess:. Deesesed's new A. id that his father and he were on Saturday the elk inset, in repairing a hem; at Peckham. ghost logiliaat= on that Aeneas they wen standing on the emarkiing, when diseased incautiously removed a plank Ukiah wee attached to the wall, and stooping down to IMIlla• Mr to a polo, mimed his footing and Gal th a iih o e aperture ca used by the removal of the plank—a of about 90 feet. A surgeon was sent for,whit immuliste remora/ to the hospital. Mr. WM= Reim, harm sur geon, proved that deceased had died Dem the Werke he received, sad the jury returned a verdict of «deidsstsl Death." Tai SUSPECTED SUICIDE lit Gaets‘rlat PARK. —Oa Monday morning, Mr. Canter, the coroner for West Kent, held antequet on the body of a zespectably dressed man who was bead dead in Greenwich Park on Friday last by pelimeenstshit 111 S. with a small pieta', haarlag the name of " Smith, imam ' Leedom," on it, grrpad firmly is has right head. his fore-finger oa the and a wound bon a bellet ea his right temple. The tri S has set been ldetded, neither was there say evident", dosed to throw the lees light ea this mysterieve slhir ; = direction of the coroner, the jury returned as open THE EXPRESS, WEDNESDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 26, 1851. iria)33 intelligence. EQUITY COURTS.—YrarzaDAT. lizrosa Till lava Jumen or MyrAi. Tort •. STEPIIRNSoN.-01WIAN V. it.Zlvlll. PRI.I.I* v. WATIIIIN. Their lordships gave judgment upon these eases, in which the principal question was, whether the lien of a solicitor upon the papers of his client was or not entitled to a priority over equitable charges upon the property of which the papers were title deeds, created prior to the deposit of the paper.. I Their lordships held that the right of lien arose entirely out of the relation of solicitor and client, and would only place the solicitor in the mute situation in point of interest as to the property, to which the papers related, u the client himself stood at the date of the deposit. The effect was that the solicitor's lien was postponed to the prior equi table charges. IN THE DIATTKE OF THE JOINT-STOCK COMMA:CID& WINDING-Dr ACTS AND OF THI lIIriZIAL SALT AND ALKALI C This was an appeal from a decision made on the 18th inst. by Vice-Chancellor Parker. It appeared that in the process of winding up the above company an order had been made by Master Tinney whereby the official manager of the company was ordered to attend him privately for tho purpose of fixing a reserved bidding upon the sale of the works of the company without notice to the re spondent, who was a contributory, and whereby the re spondent was excluded from attending before him upon the fixing of such reserved bidding. The ground for exclud ing the respondent was supposed to be that he employed a solicitor who hnd another client who was desirous to pur chase the property. The Vice-Chancellor had reversed the order of the Master, holding that by the 38th section of the Winding-up Act (11 &12 Vie., e. 4.5) the Master was de prived of all discretion as to the attendance of particular contributories in the course of proceedings before him, but that every contributory was entitled to attend at any such proceedings. Mr. Melina and Mr. C. L. Webb appeared for the Appel. taut, the official manager in support of the Master's order. Lord Justice Knight Bruce said hi. impression was that the decision of the court was required, not only on behalf of the contributories named in tho notice of motion, but also to answer the purposes of a party who acted by the same solicitor as the contributories, and who had an ad- verse interest to that of the creditors and of the share holders. If it were open to hint to act upon the impres sion formed by him upon the materials before him, he should be inclined to support the Master's order, for the order appeared to meet the substantial justice of the case. Upon tho materials b, fore him he was not, however, at liberty technically and in form to sustain the Muster's order. lie could not interfere with the Vice-Chancellor's order. Lord Cranworth concurred in the opinion of his learned brother, that the Master had no discretion under the sta tute. He could not see that there was anything behind ; but, if there was, the statute did not leave him at lihcrty to act. He did not, however, see any grounds for reluct ance in affirming the Vice-Chancellor's order—costs of all parties out of the estate. &Tram a tipcoi.O.lpx. mamas no Loa* Caws=Laos. oaovis O. BASTARD.—JCDOYENT. This appeal from a decree O 1 the late Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce was argued before his lordship on Saturday last, and reported in the Express of Monday. It will be recollected that the defendant, the purchaser of an estate from the plaintiff., complained of the Vice-Chanellor's de cree, making him pay the costs of the suit subsequent to the 3rd of August, 18 Id, and also interest upon his purchase money since the 2.lth of December, 11415. The Lord Chancellor this morning gave judgment, and said that the appeal of the defendant asked the reversal of the decree of the court below, fixing him with a portion of the costs of the suit, and that the bid might be dismissed with costs. It appeared that the defendant entered into the contract sought to he enforced by the present bill, to pur chase an estate from the plaintiffs, who were tke devisees for sale under a will. This agreement was dated Juty 1844, and the purchase was to be completed iu the following De cember. By the will in question the heir-at-law of the testator was disinherited, and the bulk of the property be queathed to the medical attendant and attorney of the tes tator; and, upon a threat by the heir that he would do- I putt the validity of the will, the purchaser refused to com plete his contract until the will had been established against the heir. The bill was then filed for specific performance, and an action at law afterwards brought by the heir to impeach the will, but without success. Upon a reference to the Muter fur that purpose, ho foetid that the plaintiffs had shown a good title before the filing of the bill, but, upon an appeal to Lord Cottenham, his lordship thought that there were circumstances attending the making of the will sufficiently suspicious to entitle the purchaser to have the will established against the heir. The ease accord ingly stood over for that purpose, and an issue was tried at law between the devisees and the heir, which again re sulted in a verdict in favour of the validity of the will. The question raised by the present appeal was which of the two partho ' vendors or purchaser, were to bear the costs of the suit? The Vice-Chancellor was of opinion that the pur chaser was entitled to have the benefit of the first action brought by the heir to test the will, and ordered the suit to stand over until after the trial. The verdict, however, being in favour of the will his honour thought that the purchaser ought to have then accepted the title, and directed him to pay all the costs of the suit subsequent to that period— comely, the 3rd of August, 1848. Thecaae then came before Lord Cottenham, sod it was what took place before him that gave rise to the present apecal. That learued judge ex pressed an opinion, upon the authority of the case of "(}rain tr. Pulsford " (2 Bea.), that the purchaser was en titled to have the will established against the heir. Now, that judgment was must important, for if it were neces sary to file a bill to establish a will upon the mere notice of an heir that he intended to oppose it, it would open the door to great extortion. lie (the Lord Chancellor) could nut subscribe to such a doctrine, nor could he entirely agree with the inference drawn by Lord Cottenham from the case of "Green e. Puhford. ' "In his (the Lord Chancellor's) opinion, something more than a mere notice by a disappointed heir of a threatened oppo sition to a will was requisite before a party should be compelled to institute a suit to establish such will. In the Fitment case nothing but the statement that the property had been left to the attorney and medical attendant of the testator had been suggested as a ground for impeaching the will, and the question was, whether the costs of proving the poundlessuess of such a charge of undue influence was to be borne by the plaintiffs, who were the successful parties. He was of opinion that the rule of this court was, that an un successful party should pay the costs is every instance except where he brought himself within an exception ; and this was only agreeing with what Lord Eldon laid dowa in the case of " Vancouver e. Bliss" II Vesey). Entirely co inciding, therefore, with the Vice-Chancellor, fin thinking that after the first trial at law the purchaser ought to have been satisfied with the title, the decree of the Vice-Chan cellor, ordering him to pay the coats since that time, mast be airmed. In addition, the Hue drawn by him of the 3rd August, 1845, for such:payment, was most favourable to the purchaser. The direction for the payment of 41. per cent. interest on the purchase-money since the time that the contract ought to nave been completed was also correct, and the whole appeal must be dismissed with costs. Ix xi BLITZ/4 PLYMOUTH, AND DIITONTOIT RAILWAY COXFAXY a matt PRAYS.. . This was an appeal from • decision under the Winding. up Act. When the case was called on, the official ma nager did not appear to prosecute the appeal. His lord ship, therefore, dismissed the appeal, with costa—if the estate should be sufficient to be paid therefrom; but, if otherwise, to be paid by the official manager personally. A similar result from the same cause followed in the cases " Ex parte Force and Drake," appeals from decisions under the winding up of the affairs of this company. His lordship will not sit again till Monday. hymn ros Muria as Roux IN to ran CAMERON'S COALIMI.OOII STIAM COAL AND Swimsar, AND LOUOIIOI RAILWAY COMPANY.—Pnyt ?ION run WINDING OP. This was a petition from several of the shareholders in this company that it be brought under the operation at the Winding-up Act. Mr. Bounden Palmer, who appeared for the petitioners. stated that the company was formed in November, MO, the capital was to be 200,0001., divided into 20,000 s hares of 101. each, and the object of the company was to work cer tain mines and collieries which were to be leased of a per son armed Cameos. and P. to make • railway between Laugher aid Swamis. whale of the capital had been paid up, and the sempury bad worked the mines and me& a parties af the rail , bat the bonuses lad been 1 ramie Ma sat of ptlrlissent bad been obtained for =AY. the hadig Lawny aama t at 414, to a branch to L that rosier ae ; =bat lo i ra Pe Eszrat set tbe lame was altered. Ac- One heel been t against the esaimay, sad indir mega gleamed • and Mr. Wettriagball, one of the pen tium.., red a dierebolder, lad • willaprevarate7 to the • et eassadir. sereed:upsa lie by Bow, a judgment medhoe, he 2541. L. 21., similar notices by Mks areliten for other sums, smonatiag is the aggregate to IS3I. bk. Other petitioners, Mr. Pitched Homy and Ms. Canes, also shareholders and petitioners, had had dailse sedan served upon them, the respective sums bug 1,01141. sod 3,1851., and the shareholders in question had perm& entices as the eampany. It also appeared that the osay was ao lisps earrytag ea business . , and that their at their aim bad been &strained. Mr. MMeMen, who emron, tho bolder of 11,010 aberell, ar misted be Mr. dm pan Ceme granting of the peti tion, an der rimed gaM dot TU. Maeda, Irk had retort to great immt that negettilises wore going on between the dieselme and know thamholders by which they might oblaao vie, that then had bees a meeting at the Leaden Ts en the 7th, inst., at which it was unanimously re solved tfot It was not desirable to wind up the company ; also tbeg the railway was nearly completed, and that when it was, and the weeks were in operation, they would be " 2,,r5,„81.1.7 , etre appeared for newel other sheen. holders, Memel en the rams side. The Mater of the Rolla granted an order for winding-up, the order not to apply to the railway company. Barone YwnCnApos.. - CALDWILL IP. Vltalinni &taw - Paciretten. This was an application for an intimation to rattails Ver ball die owner, and Swill; the eyes* el vowel called Vet the OlaaMeellhecht. treat as fiaissiskii within the Vohs el Omit Braids, or the esee eat ohm thereat, the finelAlaad3aaw Low., as way mile es ter the s et worth merely einem* theeelkewa. muts turd with rash ono et prerelisa midi ' oat the license of the plaintiff. Notice of 'notion bad been given, bat room appeared for the defendants, and the injunction wax mated. TRUFFLES OF TitleHlTLn LEA NAVIGATION O. Tlll --- Gt , VERNOR ateu COMpANT ur Tag NNW RIVRIL Mr. Culvert (with whom was Mr. Bodwell) renewed his motion for an injunction to restrain the New River Com pany from continuing to maintain and uphold a certain course of bricks upon the lip or upper edge of the turnpike, or tumbling-bay, across Manifold -ditch, and from main taining the said turnpike or tumbling-bay of any greater height than it has bees heretofore, and from omitting or neglecting to maintain the turnpike or tumbling-bay so low as to keep or reduce the head of water flowing down the ditch upon a level with, and not higher than, the top of the marble gauge or trough, and the two-adjacent capped stones placed as standards at the brick arch and Chadwell spring; and that they might also be restrained from taking any rester quantity or body of water out of the river Lee, or Manifold-ditch, into the New River, through the marble gauge or trough, than such quantity or body as can run and pass through the gauge or trough in a natural course, and without any pen, and from doing or omitting anything whereby the water below the marble gauge or trough should be lower than its former level, or whereby any super fluous water more than can pass through the gauge with a natural current might be prevented from falling over the turnpike or tumbling-bay into the river Lee. The question raised by the motion was, whether some re cent works of the New River Company had the effect of obtaining from the river Lee a larger quantity of water than they were entitled to take under the provisions of the statute of the 12th George IL, c. 32, which regulated the communi cation between the two streams. It appeared to be ad mitted on both sides that the New River Company had a right to the water which passed through the gauge, and had a right to draw from the river Lee no greater body or quantity of water than would pass through the gauge. The plaintiffs relied on the words of the statute, which directed that the water should be permitted to peas over the Mani fold-ditch, to the turnpike and sluice near Chalk Island, " in 4 natural course," and they contended that notring should be done which would have the effect of increasing the momentum and velocity of the stream musing through' the guage. The works which were complained of had, they alleged, and as they argued was shown by the affida vits, the effect of augmenting the rapidity of the stream, and thrrefore obtaining a greatly increased quantity of water through the Parse orifice. Mr. Bothell and Mr. Toiler, for the New River Com pany, argued that upon the statute it was plain that only three things were prohibited with reference to this dispute 1. The New River Company were not to mike an artificial head or pen above the marble gauge; 2. They were not to alter the natural flow or current of the stream ; and, 3. They were not to augment the dimensions, and thereby increase the capacity of the gunge. The company had done none of these things. They had made no alteration above the guage ; but there was nothing to prevent them from clearing or opening the flow of water below the guage, even though that might have the effect of accelerating the passage of the water. Mr. Calvert replied. Vice-Chancel!or Turner said, this application was made on four several grounds—First, to restrain the defendants frompermittiug the water to flow from Manifold ditch, through the new cut ; secondly, to restrain them from takiug any other water than eau pass through the ditch in its natural course, without any " pen ;" thirdly, to re strain them from taking the water through any other cut than that which existed under the act ; and fourthly, to prevent them from doing any other act which should pre vent the water flowing in its natural channel. It was obvious that the assistance of that court was only called in to aid the courts of law; and it must be satisfied that at least the legal rights of the parties were open to great doubt, and that irreparable injury would result, without the interference of the court. He considered that the Ist and 3ril questions, and the 'ltd and 4th, rested substantially on the same grounds. The first depended almost en tirely on the legal construction of the sth section of the act —(his Honour read the section as before set out)—and the question was whether that section had so irretrievably bled the course by which the water was to flow to the marble gauge that no alteration could ever be made. It had been said that if the company were entitled to deviate ut all, there was nu reason it should not alter the whole course of the channel, and altogether escape the " tumbling busy." Extreme cases might be put on either side; but if he was to grant the present injunction, he must say that no alteration at all could be made, and ho was not prepared to affirm that proposition. Where the act intended to prescribe that exact limits should be maintained they were stated on the face of the act, as in the case of the wooden trough, which woo always to be continued of the same dimensions; but with respect to other parts it has obly said that the main works were to be continued the same as they then were. Then, was there any case of irreparable injury? lie could not say there was. There might be conveniences on the one side and on the other. On the one, if the court did not interfere the trustees might lose the water to which they were entitled; on the other, if it did, the company might be unable to supply its customers. But, moreover, he thought the case was not made out in point of fact. It was true that three occasions were stated in the affidavits on which the water had been above the top of the gauge ; but there was no statement of how long those ores- MOM had lasted; and when he found that there was a ser vant of the trustees constantly at the spot, who made no affidavit, he thought it rather suspicious. When there wire a sudden rise of water, it might well be, that, for • few moments it would rise above the top of the gauge before the " tumbling buoy" had reduced it to its natural level, and the observations might have been made at such moments. Ile should, therefore, not grant the injunction, but should direct the motion to stand over, with liberty to the plaintiffs to bring any action at law which they might be advised, and with liberty to apply again. viola VICB-CIUMMLLIM Sin R. IC I!DWLR►. SOLTAU O. Dr HELD.-INJUNCTION AB TO THE RINGING OF BELLS AT CLAPHAM. Mr. Malin and Mr. Tripp appeared for the plaintiff in this case, which was reported in the Express of Saturday last, and was a motion for an injunction to restrain the de fendant from permitting the bells of a Roman catholic chapel at Clapham to be rang. The court had given leave that the motion should be brought on to-day. This was objected to by Mr. Bagshawe, on behalf of the defendant, on the ground that the defendant had been ever since the bill was filed, out of the country. There had been no time to communicate with him, and consequently no affidavits in answer to the motion could de tiled. His solicitor had entered an appearance, but nothing further could he done. It was therefore asked that the motion might stand over, upon an undertaking that the affidavits, should be filed on or before Saturday next. Mr. Malinsaid he had no objection to this course, pro vided there was also an undertaking that the bells should not be rung on Sunday next. Mr. Bsgshawe declined to allow any such undertaking to be given. the Vice-Chancellor suggested that the plaintiff might go to Richmond for one day to avoid the annoyance. Mr. Malin said that was quite true, and though the Me could not be heard till Monday next, he would not raise ant further objection. His client must submit to this in tolerable nuisance for one Sunday more, but on Monday next he should certainly bring ou the motion. Baroas Vics.Clwcauzos Puug ea. HANDY AND ANOTHILI O. Till EAST AND WEST INDIA DucCa AND BINNINOWAN JUNCTION RAILWAY CON PANIC. . This was a motion for • sequestration against the goods and chattels of the Feat and West India rood,' an d Bi n .. ingham Junction Railway Company for breach of an in junction gsnted and undertakings given by the company (the defendants) to the plaintiffs on the 31st of January and the Bth of February last. It appeared that the plaintiffs are the owners of a valuable ropery, or rope walk, at Poplar, for the residue a • keg term of years, on which they were carrying on a valuable business. The company agreed with the plaintiffs to carry their railway in such a way that the then level of the ropery should not be in the slightest degree altered at any portion, nor the surface area, length, or ectent of the ropery in the least degree diminished, and that the work should be done to the satisfaction of the plaintiffs, with cies , tain stipulations for compensation. The company made their railway across the ropery without observing the agree ment, and on the 31st of January last, after a very lengthened hearing before the court, the company was restrained from constructing their railway through the ropery in such a manner as when finished the then level of the ropery should in any way be altered, or the surface area and length - or esteat of the ropery diminished, l entil the further order of the court, the defendants under taking not, without the leave of the court, to exercise such eight, if any, as they had to affect the raptly at variance with the agreement. The company having committed a breach of their undertaking, as the plaintiffs understood it, the plaintiffs again applied to the court on the Bth of Feb , nary last, when, saber a lengthened hearing, the company undertook to build a bridge within four months from that time to the satisfaction of Mr. Brunel, and to issue a wsr rant to the sheriff, to summon a jury to assess the damps to the plaintiffs within two months after the completion of the defendants' works. Mr. Brunel being of opinion that be was not willeiently infOrmed of the nature of the road way to be formed by the company across and over the rail way, the states was again brought before the court on the 17th of Inas 1861, when the court declared that the bridge tossitioed in the order of the Bth of F e b e wy, 1861, ought to be such • bridge as would be required kr any purpuee to which • tenant could apply the surface of the ground fee building on, or forming a public carriage or cart-road. has his order the company appealed but the Vrael hae sea been beard. It weaved from •ffidairits Mad in supped of the Reagent es that the company bad finished the meting betl s, senstructed of timber covered with gravel of a foot tkiigss. with • view to its being the person a a z & mare assess the railway, whisk as w not the Wed fo the tooties7 were bound to con struct. It also that the y lad recently ob tained the et the of ridlwa i t mania them to eree the railway he public oat h s *1,4 istaidedi to epee it for Me, 31r. Daniel and 111 r. m a . posed the motiom, ps the that the IS quato the et Xs. Mk the Y par 1.11114 tauten vs mew Woe the loud Ohmage es tipped. smi Ihiee wee topieeret haw oliateeer to the giimilltt desist et loot 111111•10.1 to MIA over 101 Y tate the appeal rg,The gussets. wee witwoher the aw -1 I;ll3See befit mrito 11 as the nowt, es the uth Jane MX, ileheed that*, ighSi were sodded to have. Swinton v. Janie. Mr. Krayoa Parker moored in support of a notion for as intanotiaa to row& the iitimintt, tiro pettish*, of Pirobtr, or Mins Open sod Promansio Oaanort Mortise onm/farts and Vasa Nals," pnigithing No. 111 (Albin work, containing Woo *what, tette boo Mendebookies original composition of music to Shakspere's " Midsummer Night's Dream," of which the plaintiff claimed to be possessed of the copyright. Mr. C. Hall appeared for the defendant, and on his ap plication the motion stood over to enable the defendant to file affidavits in reply till the first seal of the sittings after term, the defendant undertaking not to publish any copies of No. 11l in the mean time. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.-YESTERDAT. Birriskis Linio,CuirimJ., Mt Jim ics Parriwin, Ma. Juane. Potassoint, ..0 Ma. James Wmemakii. EDWAILDS ♦YD WIFE V. FIELD AND OTHULS.—ARESET OF A MARRIED WOMAN. This was an action of trover, iu which judgment as Meal* of nonsuit had been signed against the plaintiff,. The female plaintiff had been taken in execution fur costs, and discharged by Mr. Justice Patteson, upon the ground that she could not be taken without her husband. A rule was subsequently granted to rescind the order made by Mr. Justice I'attcsou, and retake the female plaintiff. Mr. Ogle now showed cause against the rule, which was supported by Mr. Gray. Lord Campbell said he was of opinion that the rule ought to be discharged. The judge had a discretion to discharge the female plaintiff, and hail well exercised that discretion. If the husband and wife had been taken together, and the wife had no separate property, the court could discharge the wife from custody. That was clear front the authorities, and among the rest from the authority of Mr. 'fidd. He (Lord Campbell) looked upon th.it authority with the great est respect, and indeed with piety, always remembering that to him he owed the success which he bad met with in his profession. The only object to be answered in this case by keeping the wife in custody was oppression, and he thought Mr. Justice Patteson had exercised a wise discretion in or ' daring her to be discharged. Her detention could be of no benefit to the creditors, who were still at liberty to take the husband. The other learned judges having concurred, the rule was discharged with costs. THE SHREWPIIVRY AND BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY COM PANY P. THE LONDON AND NORTH-WPSTSSN RAILWAY COMPANY AND THE SHROPSHIRE UNION RAILWAY AND CANAL COMPANY. Lord Campbell delivered judgment in this case, which came before him upon a demurrer to the fifth breach in an action which had been brought upon certain articles of agree ment. The articles were set out in evens.) by the defendants, and by the 4th of those articles it was provided that the agreement should not be evaded or eluded, and that no de vice should be resorted to for the purpose of evading or eluding the egret:mint. The fifth breach was assigned upon that article, and to that breach the defendants demurred generally. The points relied upon at the arguments were two, the chief of which was that the agreement was void in point of low. The agreement in question contained the terms upon which the parties had arranged that the opposi tion to certain Wits which were before parliament should be withdrawn, and it was contended that the agreement was void, among other grounds, because it was injurious to the public, inasmuch as it secured to the plaintiffs a monopoly of certain railway traffic. But the court did not consider , this objection could be sustained; it was merely an agree ment that one company should nut interfere with a certain part of the other company's line. Neither was it, as had been contended, injurious to the shareholders of the com pany, but it might even be greatly to their advantage. The same objectionslaad been taken before Lord Cottenhani, and overruled by him atter being fully argued. Lord Cottenham had held that there was nothing in the agreement contrary to the duty of the company toward. the public or their shareholders. Another objection, and one not taken before Lord Cottenham, was, that the agreement was bad in law because it was contrary to the act of parliament, which pro vided that railway companies should carry mails and troops for her Majesty. The court, however, were of opinion that the agreement contained nothing in derogation to her Ma. je.ty's rights in those respects. Upon the whole, therefore, the objections made by the defendants could not prevail; and the judgment of the court must be for the plaintiffs. Judgment for the plaintiffs. THE QUEEN O. AVEKY.—QUO Mr. M. Smith moved for a rule calling on Mr. William Avery to show cause why a writ of quo warranto should not be filed against hint to inquire by what authority he held the office of a town councillor of the borough of Barn staple. Ile moved on In half of Mr. King, of Bradillird, who was at the head of the conservative list of candidates at the last election for town councillors, Mr. Avery being at the bottom of the liberal list; and the affidavits dis closed the same facts which had been brought before the court on Saturday but, when a rule I,r a quo warranto had been granted, calling on the same defendant to show by what authonty he held the office of Mayor of Barnstaple. Rule granted. BAIL COURT.—YESTERDAT. IN B.ani. -Btnisw NII:. Jt , TICI Eau. THE Query r. LE SLIE.. _ _ .. Mr. M. Smith, on the part of Mr. Ferris, applied for a rule calling upon Mr. John Leslie to show cause why on in formation in the shape of a quo warrant° should not issue, requiring him to state by what authority he held the oilier of alderman of the borough of Barnstaple. The defendant was elected on the Nth November, upon the supposition of an extraordinaryvacancy having been created in the office of alderman for the borough. A Mr. Latham, the former alderman, was elected in November, 12410. ne left Barn staple on the 14th of May last for France, where he resided for the last sit months. His period of other would not have expired until the 14th November. The town clerk having, however, issued the usual notice for the election of an alderman in the place of Isatham,about the 2nd of November, the defendant was elected on the Sth of the same mouth, being the day previous to the election of mayor. By the 52nd stains of the Municipal Corporations Act those cases in a hich the office was declared vacant or voidable were provided for, but there was no provision of the act under which the election in question could be considered Application granted. THE QUEEN V. ALLEYNE AND ANOTHER. _ In this case an indictment was pending under which the defendants were charged with obtaining from a Captain Kennedy a sum of 8,0001. by alleged false pretences upon the subject of certain horse races. A rule nisi having been obtained on a former day, calling upon the prosecutor to furnish the defentlant4 with a state ment specifying the particular matter., which they proposed to prove, ou the ground that several of the counts in the in dictment were vague and uncertain, Mr. E. James with Mr. Hawkins appeared to show cause against the rule, on the grounds, that, although the trial was pending for a considerable tune, the defendants never thought it necessary to raise this objection till about a week ago, and the prosecutor believed that the application had been made for the mere purpose of delay. Mr. lluddlestone having distinctly disclaimed such an in tention on the part of the defendants, Mr. Justice Erie recommended the prosecutor to furnish a statement to the defendants to the effect that the general counts in the indictment were to be supported by the same evidence that was to support those other counts that were specifically brought forward. It was ultimately agreed upon that a statement should be drawn up by the learned judge by the following morning to the above effect, the defendants binding themselves to inter medno delay in the case being tried at the time already IN RE BINNS, AN ATTORNEY. A rule nisi calling upon this gentleman to answer a charge connected with his profee.ional character, haring been granted upon the exparte statement of a certain party, Mr. E. James showed cause againq the rule. lie com plained of the great injustice that had been done his client, by publishing his name in connection with so serious • charge, upon an exparte statement made by an individual. It was directly opposed to the usual practice of the court in respect to such matters, and the result was most unwar rantable attacks made upon Mr. BMus in some of the morning newspapers. Mr. Dines was prepared to prove the utter falsehood of the charge from beginning to end, and was extremely anxious to have the matter investigated with the utmost possible speed, in order that he might be able to adopt proceedings against the newspapers, for the justification of his professional character. Mr. O'Malley said he represented very poor parties con cerned in this matter. tinder such circumstances, he trusted that his clients would be furnished with copies of the affidavit, to be used on the other side, without being required to go to the expense of procuring office copies. Mr. E. James—Oh certainly, we will reader every assist. mom in our power, so as to have the inquiry disposed of u speedily as possible. The matter had already been made the subject of public attacks in newspapers, to the serious injury of Mr. Binna's professional character. In the Morning Advertiser of yesterday appeared an article renewing the charge against Mr. Blom, and com menting at some length upon his alleged misconduct. Mr. Justice Erle--Let the matter be referred to the Muter, both sides furnishing copies of the affidavits used, and no objection to be taken by either party as to thimenot being office copies. It is scarcely necessary to observe that in matters affecting the character of attorneys, it is the usual practice not to mention the name upon an ex parte application. The learned Judges of the Court of Exehequer had also agreed that that was the proper practice. Mr. Joyce, who made the application for the rule nisi, said that he was not aware of the practice. Mr. E. James hoped that these newspapers which had mentioned the matter would do Mr. lions justice by say ing that he courted the most thorough investigation into his character, and pledged himself to further the inquiry as speedily as possible. Mr. BMus himself drew his lordship's attention to the fact of his being severely attacked in an article whisk in a newepaper yeeterday =erring, and pro eh d the charges therein made against him te be utterly untrue tram beginning se end. .7 ; us Citrzir e. DUmLICLIPP. Mr. Peacock applied for a rule Ceiling upon Mr. John Dunaielit to show amuse why en information in the nature of a quo warranto should not issue requiring him to show liy what authority he held the office of Mayor of Derby. m• aildavita disclosed a course of proceedings in the elee ties of this gentleman which was not in accordance with the provisions of the 51st section of the 5 & 6 Will. IV., e. 76, under which such elections should be conducted. Rale granted. COURT OF Exruv•-- -YESTERDAY. Immo It BANoo.—laws rot Loss CAIU Raiox. Wt. Law Pam. RA. Samoa Aubsaiss, uo Ma. Balm MARTIX. v. THE .' NA ll l4 ll Vg.' The decision of the Court of Exchequer is ibis aro , which was announced to be given yesterßay; hes been postponed until Monday next. The Chief Baron intimated, as the reason for this further postponement, that one of the . _ learned judges is desirous of neon;idering MIN of the peiate which have bees raised. This subject is referred to la mother column. HORNIDOR 7. IIAWEINS.—ACTION VEON AN AT TORNEY'S BlLL.—CommtrrAL Or THE DEFENDANT FOR This was an action which was tried before Mr. Baron Martin on Thursday and Friday last, in the Exchequer Chamber, when a verdict was found for the plaintiff—dam ages 1891. This case has acquired great interest from the fact of its being one of the earliest of those in which a judge has used the power given him by the New Evidence Act, of committing a plaintiff or a defendant whose evidence is clearly untrue. Mr. Watson, Q.C., now moved for a rule for a new trial, on the ground that the verdict was against the weight of evidence. The action was brought to recover she amount of an attorney's bill of costs in four suits in which he acted as attorney for the defendant. The defence made to the action was that an agreement had been made between the defendant and one Jordan, the plaintiff's clerk, with the concurrence of the plaintiff himself, by which Jordan undertook to act for Mr. Hawkins in the capacity of an attorney. The plain tiff was to be paid by the fees which would become due to him by using his name. In order to prose that the contract was with Jordon and not with the plaintiff, the defendant produced a memorandum of an agreement which he had drawn up, and which he alleged Jordan had signed some days after an interview had taken place between them, but how long after he could not swear. lie, however, dis tinctly stated that the memorandum was signed by Jor dan. This Jordan denied, and also denied having ever seen the memorandum. Several witnesses also con tradicted the defendant's evidence in this particular. The learned judge then ordered the defendant to he prosecuted for perjury, taking his recogniaances to appear at the en suing sessions cf the Central Criminal C nrt, and binding the plaintiff over to prosecute. To corroborate the state ment of the plaintiff it was shown that a Mr. Manning had been the defendant's solicitor before the plaintiff was em ployed, and that Jordan had been Mr. Manning's clerk, ann that it was at the request of the defendant that tho plaintiff took Jordan into his employ, he being acquainted with Mr. Ilawkins's legal affairs. Mr. Watson now con tended that the evidence at the trial did not go so much to overwhelm the defendant as the weight of prejudice cast upon him in the reply made by the plaintiff's counsel, and by the severe cross•examination administered to him. He had been asked many questions about his affairs, such as t' How much money have you in the world? Are you not acquainted with two old ladies? Do you not expect a legacy from them ?" All these ques tions, and the remark, of the plaintiff's counsel, tended to damage the defendant's evidence, and against that he had no means .of contending. It was all very well for the plaintiffs counsel to appeal to the jury nut to impute per jury to the plaintiff, the same canton should have been given in respect of the defendant. Mr. Baron Alderson—But you did not expect the plain tiff's counsel to be so chivalrous, dad you ? (A laugh.) A jury, howevuse„ might to be very cautious how they charge a party with perjury. it was a very different thing to say that A is guilty of perjury or that It is guilty of perjury, from saying we cannot make up our minds whether A or B is guilty of perjury. if the jury had been in any doubt upon this point they ought to have said so. Mr. Baron Martiu—They said expressly that they be lieved the defendant to have been guilty of perjury. The Lord Chief Baron—l do not ate how we can interfere in this case. The matters with which the jury have dealt are clearly within their province, and there is no suggestion that they have been misled or that they have found a ver dict se clearly contrary to the facts as to warrant a new trial. Mr. Watson—My lord, I feel that wo arc taking the first • step in a new mode in the administration of justice, in which every defendant must prepare Minim If for what has befallen the defendant here, and will befall every plaintiff also should it be the business of the defendant to begin. Mr. Baron Alderson—Why, yes. In this ease one Flirty has been committed for perjury, a second charged with it, and a third rendered liable to pumshtuent. AU this has arisen because the defendant has had the gross imprudence to deal with an attorney's clerk instead of an attorney. You have talked of cheap taw, but in seeking for it you get neither law nor cheapness. (Laughter.) Mr. Watson—l feel so strongly that the jury have acted upon prejudiced impresiions produced by the reply, and the insinuations of the cross-eszu ll ill Aim], that I think my client is entitled to a rule. The Lord Chief Baron—l think if a rule were granted, that we should rather be usurping the functions of a jury, than correcting any errors which they may hava made. Mr. Baron Alderiou—lt may lead to the hearing of the defendant's counsel, after the plainti ff s have been heard in reply. It is certainly very hard that an innocent defendant should be tripped up by a new prejudice, created by a speech in reply. You will find a great deal about the un fair operation of the reply of the plaintiff's counsel in the old report of the law commissioners. It was recommended 20 years ago that an alteration should take place. How ever, it is absurd to think that we can interfere in this The Lord Chief Baron said he thought that the court would be substituting the court fur the jury if they inter fered in this case. '1 he jury were the constitutional judges of matters of fact. They had heard all the witnesses, and they had come to a conclusion, and Mr. Baron Martin had committed the defendant for perjury. The detendant did not complain of any surprise, ur that the evidence was all one way, or that the jury had been misled. lie did not think that the passing of the New Evidence Act should in terfere with the ordinary practice of the court. Plaintiffs and defendants were now to be examined, and would be open to have the same observations made upon their testi , moav as other witnesses had been. Ile thought the court should not interfere in this case. Rule refused. SAME V. SAME. Mr. M. Chamber,, hating obtained a rule yesterday calling upon the defendant to show cause why the recog nisance' to appear at the Old Bailey on the pro.ecution tor perjury directed by Mr. Baron Martin .liould not be re. spited tor another 14 salon, and no cati.e being . hewn, . . Mr. Atkinson now mov . i.ll to make the rule In answer to several questiens from the bench, it ap peared that the recogni,auces had not been delivered Into the Exchequer, tie. court in which the record was, at Nisi rrius, and that the act of parliament did not give any directions on the subject. They had been forwarded to the Clerk of Arraign., in conformity with the usuel custom. The court intimab d that they bad no power to interfere to make the rule absolute, but hinted that the application should be made at the Old B.dley, where Mr. Buren Parke would sit to-morrow. Mr. Baron Alderson—We do not tell you that you :night not be right in going to the Old Bailor, but we tell you that you are wrong in coining here. (Laughter.) eACIS C. CON.. . . . This was an action for criminal conversation with the plaintiff's wife, which woo tried before Mr. Justice Eric at the last Gloucestershire Assizes, when a verdict was found for the plaintiff, damages 101. Mr. Cooke having obtained a rule in the course of the present terni for a new trial on the ground of surprise, and also upon affidavits impugning the credibility of the plain tiff's witnesses, Mr. Scrjesnt Allen now showed cause against the rule. It appeared that the plaintiff and the defendant both lived at Cheltenham, and that the plaintiff, who was about 70 years of age, had married a woman who had bees 'his ser vant. The principal evidence as to the adulterous inter course which was alleged to have taken place wiis a boy about 14 years of age, who was a brother of the plainti ff re wife. Ile stated that on one occasion he had entered the plaintiff's house, and had seen his sister and the defendant in such a situation as to leave no doubt of their crimina lity. The other evidence in the case was to the effect that the defendant had been seen to enter the plaintiff's house very often when Mr. Page was away, and also that he had M. Page into the Cheltenham Theatre. The learned aecrs eerjeant now contended that the rule should be discharged, and produced affidavits to contradict the affi davits of the defendant, which cyst suspicion upon the boy who bad given the material evidence in the case. The learned serjeant also produced affidavits in explanation of certain circumstances in the case, and denying certain ad mission which it was alleged that the plaintiff had made. The most important admission which the plaintiff denied was, that he bad suborned the brother of his wife to com mit perjury. The learned serjeant likewise produced an affidavit of a person named Richard Bullock, who swore that the defendant and the plaintiff's wife had slept to gether at a house in London. Mr. Cooke, having addressed their lordships in support of the rule, The Court said the rule for a new trial would be made absolute, provided the defendant paid all the costa already incurred within ten days. At the second trial the affidavit of the plaintiff, denying that ho had suborned Mrs. Page's brother to commit perjury, was to be read. If, before the second trial, the defendant sold any of his property, then the rule would be discharged, and no second trial would take place. RAABE V. BALDWIN. This was a rule, obtained by the plaintiff in puma, to Set aside the special jury, and to try the muse to-morrow, in its order, by • common Jury. Mr. Benin showed came on affidavits, stating that this wee an action of libel fur an article which appeared sin years ago . in the Morning Herald newspaper, and he peeeeeded to satisfy the court that the defendant's steps had been regular throughout, and that, coasequently, this rule ought to be discharged with eau. The defendant swore that the spe cial jury was sot struck for delay, but that every step had been tales in dial order, and that he should be ready to go to trial when the muse was rushed. Kiss Hoare addireseed the court in support of her rule at MOOS* length, and with considerable energy, contending that she was entitled to have the cause taken in its order to morrow, it being at the head of the list, if tried at • com mas delay She also urged that the defendant was guilty of delay and vexatious opposition to her proceedings, and exclaimed bitterly against the notion that she MRS to enter tain all her witnesses till the special jury days began, and should have to pay the cuts of this rule. The mart stated that the rule being answered must be discharged with costs ; and, as to the question when the male would be takes, that se nt be answered toimorrow at 10, whoa the Chief Bares would make sae, order as the ere requited, on application made to him. Flak dieeharged with costs. TIMASTORSIFT-GIINVRAL O. Tait far. ILATRRRINZ'S Duct COMPARY.—APPLICATION FOR CIRTAIN WRITS OP DWurust. Yr. Pella& moved is this ease for three writs of deli , eery toi-00 directed to the Commissioners of Caftans, cal -1 Wag upon them to deliver over certain goods belonging to the company which had been seised sad enured by-t~a atemeisnozon in their indentures of ap e object of this application, we understood, w the, I =laded be charged with the duty which ink* Application granted. - ; :f •_. . " r v