The Express.
London, England, 1855-02-10 00:00:00

EQUITY COURTS.-FEB. 9.

WOOLS TEE ISAMU OIP VOW.
JZl7llllla V. ItICHILL.
This was a suit to compel the payment of a legacy of 1601.
left by the grandfather of the plaintiff's wife, formerly
Elisabeth Bawden. The suit became necessary in conse-
quence of there being another granddaughter of the testator
bearing the same name. Evidence was given on the part of
the plaintiff to show that his wife had lived in the house of
the testator (the grandfather) for several years previous to
his death, and that he occasionally visited her father and
mother for several months at a time, and farther, that the
other granddaughter, who seldom saw him, was not treated
with any particular notice. Nevertheless, the executors
were in a difficulty in consequence of both the grand-
daughters being of the same name, as to which they should
pay the legacy to.
His Honour held that the plaintiff's wife was evidently
the poem the testator meant to be the object of his
bounty, and ordered payment to be made to her, with
interest for six years previous to the filing of the bill.
Mr. R. Palmer and Mr. House were fur the plaintiffs ;
Mr. Follett, Mr. DI:cholla, and Mr. Gill, for the other parties
interested.

3.11 THE 'AXE

KIIRIT Aire'
COY

GOLD lUNING

Mr. Ciluse (with whc7usVu Mr. Roxburgh)) appeared
to support this petition for winning up the affairs of the
above company. It appeared, however, that suits were
proceeding before the Vice-Chancellor Wood in reference
to the same object, and
His Honour declined to go into the question or deal with
the matter.

BAIL COURT.-FEB. 9.
moos AT EU WM-MOM
_IIT. =MCI AMA AND A 111111 C

JOLT.
The wart was occupied the entire day in besting a ease
of Dowell and °then T. the General Steam Navigation
Company, which was not concluded when the court rose.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-FF.B. 9.
• ay W14:10.-111101.1 IA OS PIM. azzamoa, PLATT, AND
lIAITLS.

WATSON V. NIINPNILEY AND LII.—IDEPORTANT nIINSTION.
In this cue the Lords Justices had directed a special cue
to be stated for the opinion of this court.
It appeared thst on the 13th of April last year Humphrey
obtained a judgment for 95i., damages and outs, in an
action against Watson, under which the latter was taken in
execution. On the Lth of May, Watson petitioned the In-
solvent Court, at Ipswich, and inserted in his schedule the
defendant Humphrey, as well as his other creditors. Wat-
son was discharged by eider of the court, but Humphrey
subsequently treated that proceeding as an set of bank-
ruptcy, and thereupon filed • petition for adjudication in
bukruptcy, in London, against Watson in respect of the
same debt, and on which the adjudication subsequently
proceeded, and from which debt the insolvent had been
discharged by the Insolvent Court at Ipswich.
In this state of mutton, Watson presented a
petition to the Lords Justices, praying the reversion of Mr.
Commissioner Holroyd's adjudication. The case underwent
considerable discussion, when it was arranged that Watson
should bring the present action against Humphrey and Lee,
who, in their character of assignees under the adjudication,
had seised the whole of his property. It was also agreed
that the present ease should be stated for the opinion of this
court, as to whether the debt due to Humphrey upon the
judgment recovered on the 13th of April last year was •
goof and sufficient debt of the petitioning creditor to sup-
port the adjudication in bankruptcy.
Mr. Cowling and Mr. Esther, of the equity bar, now ap-
peared on behalf of the plaintiff, and contended that Hum-
phrey's debt was satisfied in law by the arrest and subse-
quent discharge of the plaintiff, and that inasmuch that no
action Gould be brought on it, so no adjudication in bank-
ruptcy could be founded upon it.
Mr. M. Smith and Mr. Daunt, on the other hand, for
the defendants, argued that upon the true construction of
several sections of the Insolvent Act, 1 and 2 Vie., rt. 110,
and likewise on various decided cases, a debt was not sa-
tisfied by the mere taking of the debtor, for a holding in
prison was also requisite, and therefore that as, in the pre-
sent case, the debtor had been discharged by the operation
of the law without his creditors' consent the debt was not
satisfied, but continued in force, inasmuch, at all events, as
to constitute a good petitioning creditor's debt.
The Court expressed a unanimous opinion in rapport of
this view of the question, and after having taken a review
of the circumstances said, that upon the authority of de-
cided cases, as well as upon the construction of the statute
itself, it was the opision of their lordships that the plaintiff
had been properly adjudicated a bankrupt. The judgment
of the court must therefore be entered for the defendants.

Jedgenect accordingly.
ERARN O. TRU LONDON AND .OUSE WISTIRN RAILWAY

COMPANT.—LIABILITT OP *AMWAY COXPANIIS.
Mr. Baron Parke,'upon this case being called on, said
that his brother Alderson and himself must disclaim all par-
ticipation in the judgment that might be given, as they
were both shareholders in the company.
Mr. Willes, on the part of the plaintiff, said that he
would willingly waive any objection upon that ground.
11r. Baron Alderson—No, no; it is better not, for it
plasm judges, as well as the parties themselves, in an awk-
ward position.
hir.Baron Martin trusted that his learned brothers would
reconsider the matter, and consent to hear the arguments.
There were many judges similarly situated, and if all were
to disclaim upon the same ground it would frequently be
very difficult, even if it were not to become impossible, to
dispose of the business on circuit where there was but one
judge.
The learned Barons were understood to consent to take
part in bearing the arguments.
Mr. Davin then entered upon the argument on behalf of
the company. The question at issue related to the law of
carriers, and had reference in this instance to the liability
of the oonspany to pay damages to the plaintiff for the loss
and detention of his portmanteau for four months.
The arguments occupied the wart a considerable time,
and ultimately
Their lordships intimated that the case was of so great
importance that they would take time to consider their

-Fn. 9.

SIMKO DI

; SINTICIIIIII OOLIELTDOI4 NitILX,

ca•www.. wiLuags, caoxrrox, Ami caovnigu.
ZAZILIII V. suers.—AVfAlD.

This we ea the last sitting of the court was argued at
sone length by Mr. Pidgeon.
Thew lordships baying waited some time for counsel,
Mr. Keating said that hie learned friend Mr. Whiteley,
who Ilse wait Mr. Pips, maid doubtless shortly be in
retulL haseedies le the areipaper reports, the North-
Wallet! WIN by idol* ble learned friead, Mr. Phipps,
traval4tked hem dleleyed by the heavy fall of snow, and
that havoemigtod his attendance.
Mr. maim tan said Mr. Keating must proceed.
The keened comma accordingly commenced his argu-
ment. when
Mr. Whateley come Into court and said it was undentrod
that this ease would not be proceeded with in the absence
of Mr Pidgeon, who be believed wu " snowed up."
Mr. Andes Mauls said the arrangement we. that if Mr.
Phipps, who was going out of tows, should not return in
time, Mr. Keating was to proceed.
Mr. Whiteley traded, as a matter of justice, that the
court would take the nut ease. _ .

Mauls said tbat by the consent of both parties
the case night stand over till next term.
Mr. Keating having dissented from this course, on the
greenlet mpense was desired to proceed.
Tide wee an awed made under an act of parliament by
wadi certan emmissionen were directed to ascertain the
herded want the Forest of Nan and the rights of the
free iris $e mks as sward themes. The ease erne be-