The Express.
London, England, 1855-04-24 00:00:00

ME EXPRESS, TUESDAY EVENING. APRIL 24, I

lab) itlielicleact.

- -
mews non-cuarmaus UR IFILUAN PASS weal.
LOY= IP. DVIIIMION.—COVI RIGHT.
Mr. with whom was Sir. gird, moved fir as in
junction to restrain the defendant from publishing hie nogg,
" The Low-hocked Car," whisk he had adapted to the
mule of an Irish air, and which he had re arranged for the
purpose. The composition bud been prepared in 1816, and
on the 7th of December 1846, wee registered in Amain
and in Loudon, as his copyright ; the regietry in this
country having been made, by his request, by Messrs. Don
and Hodgson, the well known musical publishers. These
gentlemen, however, bad committed a mistake, which they
afterwards rectified, inasmuch u they bad registered it In
their own names. The defeedant, Mr. Davidson, the music
publisher, of Peter'abill. Doetere-common, had else pub-
lished the song in his periodical, the Musical Mowry,
describing it as The Low-basked Car; a characteristic
Irish song, as given by the author is his Irish Even-
ings, written and composed by Samuel Lover." Mr. David-
son justified his publication, insisting that he bad a
right to copy it from an Americus work ; that it was
doubtful how far the publication of it in America could give
Mr. Lover say right Lore theat he had misrepresented
himself as the eomposer of music as well sa the words,
which be was net ; and that there had been delay.
Mr. Selwyn appeared for the defendant.
Ilia Honour granted an injunction, restraint's: the de-
fendant from publishing the book called in the entry of the
registrar's book at Stationers' Hall, "The Low-backed
Car," the plsintiff undertaking to bring an action at law,
and to abide by such order as the court should make as to
damages, with liberty to apply. The recent decision of
" Jeffreys v. Boring" in the House of Lords only neiratived
the right of a foreigner to claim cop rig he being out of
the jurisdiction. It was anent as to the ease of as English
author first publishing to a foreign country. Mr. Lover
had not claimed any authorship in the music; he called the
work hook called" The Low-backed Car." The adaptation
of new weeds to old music entitled the author to a copyright.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.—Arsu. 23.
/MIRO§ Q 11M100.-1110/1 LOID CAIIFIIILL, ASP rumens error
WAX, SILL LIM 0101117011.
THII OM= 11. TX$ EARL OF llollallaT
all? OF WALTMAY 1011111 T.
Sir F. Meeker (with him Mr. Willis) moved for grate I
in the nattered/ • quo warrant° eallicg upon the Earl of ,
Meratagteat r show by what authority he 'incised tl'e
saes 41r bad issmilisa of the repel form of Waltham. The
saga had berm emallrned by royal grant on the maternal an.
eselliee of Lord Kensington, who had held the dace as
by courtesy. His lordship had however mortgaged
Ihie to a person, from whom his son, Lord Walesley,
the priesst epplicsnt, bad purebesed it. Lord Mornington
had however been allowed to remain in possession of the
office. The present application was made oa the ground
that on the 121 h of April a court was held, presided over by
Lord Mornington, when Major Riebaraeon was sworn in as
deputy warden ; and on that oiseasion the earl said that Lord
Wellesley was of unsound mind, sad incapable of managing
his affairs. This imputation was totally grrmodleas, and he
would contead that as all right to the ogle* bad passed to
Lord Wellesley he was entitled to apply for the pseud rule.
Lord Campbell said it might be doubtful whetter the
question at issue between the parties could he tried on a
motion fora quo warrant°. This appeared to be rather in
V e nature of a private than a public right, and as Lord
Wellesley was entitled to the profits of the office, be might
bring as action against any one usurping his rights. The
court were however of opiaion that the learned counsel
might take a rule to show eause.—Rule aoeordingly.
THE EDWIN V. NEWTON AND ANOTHZE.—THE BIULAN
SPA APPALL.

r.—wAiniit-

Mr. H. Hodson, on behalf of the defendants, moved for •
rule to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not
issue commanding the Attorney Chimed to grant his fiat for
• writ of error. Tie defendants were tiled in December last
at the Central C rimiest C ourt on an indictment charging them
with wounding with intent to murder. Tee, were acquitted
of the felony, but were found guilty of the misdemeanour
of unlawtnily wounding, and were sentenced—one to
nine and the other to three months' imprisonment. Babas-
Tonneau application was made to the Attorney-General to
grad his flat for a writ of *nor, on the ground that the
Central Criminal Court had no jurisdictioa to try the defen-
dants. It appeared that the indictment alleged that the
offence had bus committed in the perish of Lambeth,which
was within the jurisdiction of the court. It was proposed to
show by the writ of error that the offence was committed at
the Beulah Spa, which is in the parish of Croydon, and be-
yoad the limits of the jurisdiction of the court, bat this
point was not raised at the trial. The Attorney-General
declined to grant his fiat on the ground that the erre,
sought to be assigned would be alleging • fact iriceseietent
with the finding of the jury, as it appeared upon the reseed.
He now contended that when there was reasonable cause •
arty was entitled as of right to his writ of error en debit.
Justine, and this court could control the decision of the At-
torney-General.
Lord Campbell said the learned counsel must show that
there was reasonable and probable cause, and then he would
be entitled to the writ ex debito justitie, and he must also
show that the court had the power to govern the decision of
the Attorney-General.
Mr. Hodson submitted it was clear that the Central Cri-
minal Court bad no power to try the defendants aid that
the court, if it had the power, would grant the mioulamus to
compel the Attorney General to deliver his fiat. He eta-
tended that the court had this power, and in support of his
argument cited the judgment of Lord Mansfield in "The
King v. Wilkes" (4th Burrower' reports).
Lord Campbell said that if he had to consider whether
the learned Attorney-General had exercised a sound dime-
ties in refusing his fiat, he was of opinion that he had. I
The question, however, simply was, whether or not the
Beulah Spa was within the jurisdiction of the Central
Criminal Court. That point had not been raised at the trial,
and had been taken as admitted before the jury. That
being so, it would be most prejudicial to the interests of
justice if such an applicatina as had been made to the Atter-
oey 0 I bad been granted. He did not, however, found
his judgment on the merits of the case in question but
au the ground that this court had no jurisdiction
to reverse the decision of the Attorney. General. He
agreed that in a use of misdemeanour • writ of error was
a matter of right ex debit* justitie, and the Attorney-
0e I ought to grant his fiat. If the Anew y 0 1
laud to consider the avlication, a mandamus ought to
go ; but he had to exercise a discretion in a quasi judicial
, and if he did exercise that discretion ttii. court
bad no right to interfere. If the Attorney-General acted
improperly, complaint might be made against him to par
fitment, and he might be impeached and dismissed from
his office by the crown, who would appoint • successor to
fulfil his duties. It was a maxim that where a functiousry
had a discretion to exercise, and did exercise it, the court
would not interfere by mandamus. In support of the pre-
sent application no case bad been cited except a dictum of
Lord Mansfield's, in Wilkes' case, and that learned judge
himself had said that Burrows.' reoorts were not always to
be relied on. He entertained great doubts whether Lord
Mansfield had ever used the exact word attributed to him,
there being no authority for such a proposition In the books.
The rule most therefore be refused.
The other learned judges concurred.—Rule refused.
PARSONS V. ALAXANDIA.—NONIT WON AT BILLIARD*.
This was an action tried during the present term before
Mr. Justice Erie. The dr:Oration was on • banker's
cheque, and on an account stated. The defendant pleaded
that the cheque was given and the account stated is elapset
of money won at billiards, bet did not allege it was won by
unfair play, or that billiards was an illegal game. It hula,
boon proved at the trial that the money was won at billiards,
his Lordship directed the verdict to be entered for the
plaintiff.
Mr. Collier new moved to enter the verdict for the plain-
tiff non obstante vetedicto, and contended that as billiards
was not an illegal game within the meaning of the act the 8
& 9 Vie , a. 109, the plea was no answer to the action.
Lord Campbell said that as the question was of some
imports ere, the Named counsel might take the rale to show
souse.—ltale nid seeordlegly.

OOURT OF

=nu No.
IN 11 OLIVIZ.
This was the ranifteete meeting is the ease of J. Oliver,
irons of Hominy. His debts were IOW.; as siesta:
Ms. Lfshlat r, for the eseignes, WON* Ma Wee s nee
where beak:opal bed Was mated to ha lb. peones of
Wake wide s woreake whisk** bankrupt had given, under
wWkasremedlear bed swat of the whole of his property ;
but the engem bad ast bone able to sesseed. The case
was is me gegen ens et solifeeesse; the beishrapt had been
gob, em unman mash mare than his pram
Mis Ilsamir, after easselping the linkrapt as to the air-
senaness inn whisk ne menstage was given, said he
t the eme partly on et islebrbase, as the property
ealnsd had bon sold at a greet seseilice. He would grant
• lenadises mindsets of the mend elan.
to Its MVOs aril:.
The bealirspt was dewing as a =Graben and forage
nest, Lilypot-lase, Grand. This was
else osamilattion mantis,. Tho semilits, 'Mantis/ over
shoat this. lean previous to the bible in February last,
showed • sum of 2,12 W. due to creditors, sad 8361. of
Cities ; ante, is non debts aid property, about 6001. ;
deshttel debts, 6601.
Mr. Lemnos supported; Mr. Mon for the assignees,
satelesced is the seenste rendered ; sad the beakrept
passed.
TN 11 BINOLNY.
This was the examination meeting is the esse et P. L
Slinky (of the fires of Batley and Bieglei
sad ldoehesher
auctioneer, of Bt. Jobs's-wood. Tbe items
is the balsam sheet, which coven a peeled two yyeeaaene and
a half prier to the fallen is March lest, ere the i Mowing:
To ensnared maim. ; ditto Wake beelipis,
8,4465.; dins Wan waft railway sad nabs Ilene,
4,2211 • ditto holding aseigament, 110/. • liabilities, 2,6001.
By ea/ Riven shllll.l .psl/wF tsysged, 8,2601.;
looses, ; &Yaw M Mss minnemeateat of the so.
cent, 38'11. The lens bailed n sum e/ 1,41116 ea the
purchase sad eels of dns. 11111 i SAIL by bad ebb The
lashnipt bad acme le the ant es bb ewe pellelim.
Kr. Lanese% fee the smiguees, Alen aospgagekm, gag
the bankrupt paned.
AIM= 10. 13001111111101101 nos,
1131 111•1111.
This was the "antilleste meeting is the INN of Charles
Deane, Beet ladle isershest, of Fredielderpleee, Old
Jewry.
The almanb—listlisii•ff over tw pin prks to the
fellers in October lest—showed anm of 18,8001. di. to
neseared enable, sad 2,8081. to then Ming many

beyoub the maimalled value of the semeritles; the liabilities
were 2,7671. The assets were retuned at about 3,3001.,1
besides claims to • large amount en Bglinton and Cie., of
Calcutta, sad Zglinton, Curie and Co , of London.
bin. Lswraatis stated that the assignees saw no objection
to the bankrept baring a first-clans certifieate. The per-
sonal expenditure had been moderate Dumb below the
bankrupt's share of the profits. His books. had been well
kept, and Ise had rendered the seelisese all the mimeses, is
Me Power.
The Coentaiseioaer—What was the particular loss or mi.-
forteae is this ease, whieb you say was unavoidable ?
Mr. Lawmen' said the loss had arisen in the °ruiner,
way on merchandise. The trading had sot bun at ell of a
speculative character.
Ili. Honour, after looking through the proceedings, said
he could not grant a higher certificate than one of the
second elan.