The Express.
London, England, 1855-01-13 00:00:00

Wan lutelltgnct.

• -•••

EQUITY COURTS.-JAL 12.
SIMMS wel4lAmCoxol imparmar.
BIIONN O. 11011Bd —ATTIMPTID ISMS!.

On this case being esUed on,
Toe Nrtee-Chtneellor mid he had nmeirsd twe letters
tun two of tbl parties interested, who are ladies, offering
him a handsome present in the event of his deeding in
their favour. lie wu astonished at any ore taking moth a
coarse ; indee,t it was almost too luiterous to be believed ;
but he should hsed the letters to the Regiorer, with liberty
to the other pArties in the eaase to tyke copies of them, as
Was mail in such instances.

MAWS ISCIAWAIMIAWS em mist ROAM
VISITS O. LILY.
The plaintiff was the owner of siz 'bane In the Camber-
well
ed i Meddling
43 sad Investment Society, which
ies was esta-
blishs 18. under the Benefit Bedding Societ Apt of
6 and 7 Wm. IV., a. 32, and by indenture dated thy 13th
of deanery, 1346, he mortgaged certain property to the
trustees of the .ociety to secure the repayment of HUBS ad-
vanced to him in respect of his shares. Tbe subsequently
claimed to redeem th. prem.'s* so mortgeged, and disputes
baring arisen between him and the society, this bill was
filed cleimii g redemption. Similar disputes bad arisen be-
tween a Mr. Fleming, who was *Po a shareholder in and
mortgagor tr the society, and in that cam also litigation
arose, Ste, before the Vice-Chancellor Wood, and on appeal
i-ra the present Lord Chancellor, which remelted in the
vtry important decision as it affects building societies of
"Ft. mina •. Self," for which see the third volume of the
Repay, of Mean. De lea. Alseneghten, and G.,rdon, pegs
997. the mean time abovearing of this cense bad been
suspended awaiting the decision. The cause now
mow on f.r decision.
Atter some dimmeeina redemption was decreed according
to the terms of the deems in " Fleming y. Sat," varyikt
only au amount of bonus to be allowed to the plaintiff in
taking the accounts, so as to give to the plaintiff the boaas
actua.ly psyeb.e at the date when the plaintiff gar i notice
of his dome to withdrew. The decree was 1214.141 without
colts on either side.

coußr OF QUEEN'S BENCH.—JAx. 12.
own.. Dt ZAIKO,-111P0alt LORD mummy AID JUTICII COLS.
anus, wwerass, are cumarroo•
Till QUINN IP. TRUNILS ROANCIATLI ILMISII•LL.—CON•
DUCT OT • COUNTY COI:MT JIFOOI.
31e. Flush Hill appeared to show cause against a rule
peeg on Mr. Thomas Hornerstle Marshall, the jde of
ounty court of York, to show cause why • criminal ini
formation should not be filed against him ender the follow-
lea Orourostsne-s. It appeared from the affidavit of a Mr.
Shaw, a haunter, practising in the courts over which Mr.
Marshall was judge, that on the 19th of August last Mr.
Marshall Model/ asked Mr. Shaw whether he was the author
of a report and an article which appeared in the Wakefield
Erpress in referer.ce to a trial which had taken place, and
which Mr. Marshall believed to ducted on his conduct, and
Mr. Shaw hevicg refused to make any answer
to the judge in his judicial capacity, Mr. Marshall
bad prevented him from appearing in the cause in which
be was engaged and he had not in conocquence attended
the future sittings of the court. It appeared by the affida-
vits that the report was furnished by the reporter of the
local journal, who previous to the refusal to hear the bar.
rioter had been himself expelled from the place set apart for
the reporters by the judge, who laboured under the idea
that he had written the report in question. Mr. Shaw feel-
ing aggrieved, had, previous to his application
to this court, memorallsed the Lord Chancellor
to inquire into the cue, but his lordship had
returoed an answer to the effect that the circumstances
would not warrant him in exercising the only jurisdiction
he possessed—that of dismissing the judge. Mr. Hill
having read tbo affidavit of Mr. Marshall impugning the
repor, and denying that he bad acted in the manner im-
puted, took an objection that Mr. Shaw having once ap-
plied to the Lord Chancellor to remote Mr. Marshall, it was
not comp, tent to him now to apply for a criminal informa-
tioa against him.
Mr. Watson having been beard against this proposition
at some length,
Lord Campbell said he was of opinion that the rule should
be discharged. If Mr. Shaw had come to this court without
applying to any other tribunal, then there would be strong
grounds for their interference. There could be no doubt
that whop a judge acted maliciously in the administration
of justice he wag guilty of a misdemeanour, for which ho
Could be prosecuted. Looking at the affidevits, there
could be no doubt but that Mr. Diarrhea had acted unlaw-
fully in prohibiting Mr. Shaw from acting as a barrister,
and there were strong grounds for saying that be bad acted
maliciously. It was most shocking that suck things should
occur in courts of justice ; hut instead of Mr. Shaw coming
to this court, he had gone to the Lord Chancellor,
who had :caned to interfere. Tuffs was, therefore,
an appeal from the Lord Chancellor to the judge' of the
Court 01 Queen's Bench, and as such wan contrary to prac-
tice. The object of the application to the Chancellor was
to punish Mr. Marshall, and having failed in that, Mr.
Shaw had no right to come to this court to call fora dif-
ferent mode of punishment. It was discretionary, and not
obligatory, on the court to put tho criminal law into effect,
and in the exercise of that discretion they would discharge
the rule, but certainly without costs.
The other learned judges concurred.
Rate discharged without costs.