The Express.
London, England, 1852-07-27 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS TUESDAY EVENING, JULY 27, 1852,

RAW intelligence.

EQUITY COUIITS.-YEBTEADAI.
Bayous you Leers Jontoss or Arrest.

iN RE nu DIRECT BRETIIR, PLYMOUTH, ♦ND DITON-
TOUT Doa!LWAY C

This ease cams betbeq the send es_ pro preesediegs, the
first • pet
ea titian to dessa the eethff he winding eraby
four out of the seven persons who were seeded the
contributories to the debts of the eNessialiss ; the second,
upon a moths by the same parties te disherse au seder
for • sell Re various seassiate of the ewes esstribo-
wow ha *a el bay the assaust
of the cost up ~thew eepw. It ap-
peared that the fourwailesielb after likes steps
te get the cosanany up ander the sot, head them-
eelves andelpeted by a Wesel Ellis, soother se the seven
contributed" whe susessdled le getting as ardor to wind
up. Under this eider ea endeavour was made to fix as con-
tributories, not only the sous persons non ea the list who
bad formed the managing eseamittee, but sbe a num-
ber of individuals who had been on the aso.
mittee. For most of these attempt. the idea tneselee
waa successful before the Muter, but he all these hatessee
the Master's decision was reversed upon appeal. The NM
sequence was, that costs to the amount of 3,00111.
were incurred in prosecuting the appeals, and the
number of contributories was reduced to seem. The
Muter, in making the call, had charged sash or
tributory with such a sum as, when added to whet
he had already contributed, would make the contribution of
each • rateable one according to the number of his ohms.
The objections advanced by the petitioners on the petition
and the motion were, that the order for winding sp had
been obtained without their concurrence, and that the
andel manager was not entitled to call upon them to con-
tribute to the costs of fruitless proceedings instituted against
parties upon the speculation of bringing them in to con-
tribute. The amount of call was also objected to as having
been made upon • loos, and inaccurate estimate.
Mr. Bacon and Mr. Terrell appeared for the petitioners,
and Mr. Roxburgh for the respondents.
Their lordships dismissed both the petition and the mo-
tion with costs. _ _

Lora Cranworth, in delivering the judgment of the
court, observed, that the winding-up order, whether right
' or wrong, bad been obtained as much by the petitioners as
by Colonel Ellis. Both had taken the right course for ob-
Wising the ceder, but Colonel Ellis had succeeded in get-
ting the order first. It was therefore clearly not for the peti-
tioner, to say that he had done wrong is obtaining such sa
order. If he had not done it, they themselves would have
done it. With regard to the motion, the object of both
parties had been to extend the liability to the debts of the
company to the provisional committee-men. They at first
succeeded, but upon appeal the parties sought to be charged
were released and the number on the list reduced to seven.
It was true that thus, in the result, the petitioners gained
nothing; but in that they were only like all other litigsnts
who failed in their litigation. His lordship concluded by
observing that the estimate of the amount of costa upon
what the Master had proceeded in making the call appeared
'to be a reasonable one, and that he had adopted a mode of
apportioning the amount among the seven contributories.

Swots rm. Leas CRANctuas.
RAWLY V. THE E `V COUNTIES RAILWAY
COMPANY.

This appeal was argued before Lord Truro, but
judgment was not given when he relinquished the seals.
The parties declined to take his lordship's judgment
afterwards.

Mr. Matins, after stating that the appeal in•ol•ed
matter of immediate importance, now applied to have the
amal removed from the bottom to the top of the paper in
order to secure a speedy hearing.
The: Lord Chancellor declined to do so. The case ha•ing
been fully heard if the parties would not consent to take
the judgment of Lord Truro they must suffer the incon-
• of delay.

deposed that the man was pushed in, omitting the name of
Veal ; but they persisted in the assertion made that Veal
yes the man.
The learned counsel for the prisoners addressed the jury
in their behalf, contending that there was no satisfactvrY
proof of tile charge, the only evidence Strought against them
being by malignant workmen.
Several witoessm wen emunissed who gave both prisoners
s very excellent character ; after which the learned judge
summed up the evidence favourably to the prisoners, who
were Acquitted by tho jury, and immediately discharged.