The Express.
London, England, 1848-11-25 00:00:00

COURT OF COlp.lol,f PLEAS-YISTIIIDAY.

la Banco.
EDMONDS AND OTRIBitr V CHALLIS AND ANOTHIE.—
FORK OF CONDITION TO REPLEVIN BONDS SINCE THE
Passim; or Cooterr Comers Actg.—This was an action
to recover damages against the sheriff of Middlesex fog
having taken an invalid and insufficient replevin bond un
the redelivery to the tenant of goods which had been dia-
trained upon by the plaintiff for the sum of 351., sneers of
rent due to him. The bond in question was thus condi-
tioned: " If the said (tenant) do appear at the next county
court for the county of Middlesex, to be holden at a house
called the Sheriff's Office, in Red Lion aquare, and then and
there do prosecute his suit with effect, and shall make return
of the goods if judgment be awarded spinet him, they the
bond shall be void." At the trial before Mr. Justice Cress-
well, at the sittings in last Michaelmas tern, it eppeared
that, before the levying of the distress and the taking of the
replevin bond, the present county court, constituted under
the County Court Act, 9 & 10 Vic., c. 95, for the Whit*-
, chapel district, within which the distress was taken, was in
operation. A verdict was given for the plaintiffs, damages
361. 15e., leave being reserved to move to enter a noosing,
in case the court should be of opinion the bond taken was
sufficient. A rule nisi pursuant to leave was since obtained
for a nonsuit, and also for a new trial, upon grounds of minor
importance, namely, that the bond had been improperly
read in evidence at the trial without calling the attesting
witness., and that there was no proof of positive damage be-
yond the fact of the rent being due having been sustained by
the plaintiff—Mr. Baines, Q.C. (with whom was Mr. Daw-
son) showed cause agairudethe rule. With reference to the
main question, he argued that, at common law, where a
person's goods were distrained his wmedy was by writ ..nt
of Chancery; afterwards the statute of Merlbridge, 52
Hen. 111., c. 21, provided that upon complein: (pest queer
monism) made to the sheriff, he should forthwith redeliver,
without writ, the goods to the person wine ponds he had
taken; from which it appeared the part taken by the sheriff
was to be regarded as a proceeding out of court. Further,
the 11 Geo. 11,, e. 19, e. 23, pointed cut the duty of the
sheriff, requiring him to take in his own name a bond with
two sureties in double the value of the goods eittraiued
upen, conditioned for the prosecuting of the re,detrua
suit with effect and without deley, and for a return
of the goods, &e., end "such " bird was mad*
assignable to the party discraining as a security. Now the
plaint in replevin was formerly to be prosecuted in the old
county court, but by section 119 of the new statute, all mo-
tions of replevin, formerly brought in the old county court,
are to be brought without writ in a court under that act;
and by section 120, in every such action of replevia, the
plaint shall be holden in the court for the district wherein
the distress is made. Here then the sheriff had not acted
pursuant to the 11 Geo. 11., as i; was his duty to have done,
but had taken a bond conditioned in a form which made it a
worthless security. By that condition the tenant was hound
to prosecute his replevin in a court without jur:tdi,..tien ; it
being given by the new act in the present instance to the
Wiffteehapel District County Court. The bond her
take*, not being in pursuance of the 11 Geo. it.,
was is consequence not assignable to the plaintiffs.
As far as they were concerned, the sheriff bad
in effect taken no bond at ell, sad the sheriff
had, therefore, been guilty of a breach of duty to
the detriment of the plaintiffs, for which be was liable in
this action.—Mr. Bramwell (with whom was Mr. Burchell)
now resumed his argument, already partly heard on the
day before, in support of the rule. He submitted the
words " poet queremoniam," in the statute of Marlbridge,
meant the plaint afterwards entered in the sheriff's count.
It was the queremonis that gave the sheriff jurisdiction, and
wee, in truth, the commencement of the action of replevin.
The statute of Maribridge, in fact, put the verbal queremo •
nism on the footing of a writ, and enabled the sheriff to act
judicially out of court, but he, the sheriff, was entitled, for his
own protection, to have recorded in his own court
as hii justification the queremonia which was identical
with the plaint. 'Lord Coke, 2 Ins. 139, and Chief
Baron Gilbert, fib, supported this view of the statute.
Then the 11 George 11., c. 19, directed the bond to be taken
for prosecute. g " the suit with effect and without de1a,,,..,
that meant the suit already commenced by plaint. 'The
sheriff, it was submitted, had substantially acted in coulter-
mity with that statute by taking the present t.ond in a form
now long in vogue, nor did the secti.ns referred to in the
County Courts Act operate to invalidate this bond. That
statute lett the queremonia still to be made to the sheriff,
which he sti.t had a right to have recorded in his court for
hisjustifieation, but there the proceedings in h,s court were
made to stop. If this view of the statute were correct, and
there was something left to be done in the sheriff's court,
then the construction repeatedly put upon bonds of this
nature showed the bond in question to be in conformity
with the statute olrli:r2e 11., under which statute alone
any necessity was im upon the sheriff of taking a bond
at all ; for the wo " then and there" in a tend of
this description had been often held to mean " appear
there and prosecute the suit there or in ether appro-,
priate plate." " Geillim v. Holbrook," (1 Bos and
P., 410) And thus bonds had been held assignable though
not strictly and literally in accordance with the statute of
Geo. 11. Therefore, this bond was still good, unless the party
replevying bad nothing to do in the Sh. riff's County Court;
but if the party ought still to register his plaint there for the
protection, and in justification o. the sheriff, as it was sub-
mitted in strictness he ought to do, although he is to pro-
secute his suit in the new county court, then the new act
left the validity of this bond unaffected. The court took
time to consider their judgment.
CORDRN V. UNIVERSAL GAB LIGHT COMPANT.—Bab
CIVTION AGAINST • Al RRRRR OP • JOINT•BTOni COY-
PANY.—In this case a rule had been obtained by plaintiff
calling upon one Dominique Causes to show cause why a writ
of execution elic mid not irons against him as a member of the
above company for a debt due from the company, under the
66th section of the Joint Stock Companies Act (T. & P. Vie.
c. 110 there being no property belonging to the company.
Mr. &leant Talfourd now showed cans e against the role
and contended a similar application against Cameo as a
former shareholder having been made last term, when it
turned out unsuccessful because a sufficient ten days' notice
had not bees given as required by the act, the court would
refuse to hear a second application, especially as the former
costs were unpaid. Moreover, the fact of Cassese baving
signed the deed of settlement which recited the tuning of
thaws by those who signed, was not sufficient to make Lisa
liable as a shareholder "for the time being" within the
meaning of the statute.—Mr. Phipton having been heard fa
support of the rule. the Court said the former costs remain-
ism unpaid did not affect the present application ; nor could
there be any doubt but that, under the 3rd and 13th sections,
Causes was liable upon the facts stated as a shareholder lot
the time being, he having signed the deed, and there being
me
mistere d transfer of his shares to some one else. With
to the remaining question, se the plaintiff hail before
from
cot having given notice, which he had however
now done, in the opinion of the Court the case del not come
within the rule which forbids a second application alter a
firmer unsuccessful one of the same kind.—Rule absolute
sectsrdicgly.

BAIL COURT.—Taareanarr.
alttinp a Aosto.—Before Mr. hiettee Penmen.
Ex
plied for a role to 'how cause why a mandamus should not
issue, directing the surveyors of the highway of the parish of
Wooddittoo, in the county of Cambridge, to make a certain
road in that parish, which they had been commanded to
make by an order of quarter sessions. His lordship would,
perhaps, remember that this case had been before the court
in something of a similar form on a previous occasion. There
were two roads, an upper and a lower one, and the New-
market Railway Company were empowered, by their act of
parliament, to carry a bridge over the low r road, instead of
doing which the company had dog a foundation for a rail-
way station on the lower road, and they bed also erected a
strong fence, composed of poets and nib, by which means
the road in question was entirely blocked up. The inhabit.
ants of the town of Newmarket, in consequence of this ob-
struction, had bees prevented from using the road in question.
and they had, therefore, threatened to interfere with the
proceedings of the company. The consequence of this wee,
that negotiations were entered into between the parties, and
it was ultimately agreed that the railway compare y should
apply to the quarter sessions for an order to stoplup that
portion of the lower road upon which the station was to be
built, on condition that they would censtract a road similar
to the one market upon the plan. That road was to ammo-
niate between the upper and lower read, by which means
the inhabitant, residing In the centre of the town of New- COURT OF EXCHEQUER—YEOTIRDaY.
market might have access to the upper road. In accordance &tenpin Basso.
with this arrangement application was made to the quarter Two Arroatthrt-Ozweara. v. Watnia. —Dee, ow
sessions who directed that the surveyor of the highway BRICKS.—Ttis was an information, at the instance of the
should ;sake the proposed road. After the order had been excise authorities, to recoverrm
penalties
for the alleged use of
obtained neither the surveyor nor the railway company took stamped or " duty free " brick.. for purposes different from
any steps to construct the desired road, but continued those those contemplated by the 2& 3 Tic., chap. 24 ; the 6& 7
works by which the lower road was stopped up. A high Vic., chap. 76 (a local act) and various other ttatutte reps-
embankment had been thrown across the rood. lating the matter. At the trial before the Lord Chief
It was under these circumstances that, some time Baron during the sittings after last Trinity term, a verdict
ago, the inhabitants of Newmarket were obliged was returned for the defendant. On the 6:h inst. a rule nisi
to apply to the court for a mandamus to have this ohstruc- for a new trial, on the ground of misdirection, was obtained
lion removed. That mandamus was argued, and the court by the Attornt y General, and the facts were fully reported
made the rule absolute. A return had been made, and to in this paper next dcy.-81r F. Kelly, Q.C., Mr. Watson,
that return there was • demurrer, which was now in the Q.C., mud Mr. Wilde, appeared yesterday to show cause
demurrer paper. After the mandamus had been obtained, against that rule.—The Attorney-General appeared to sup-
the surveyor, or in fact the railway company, for they were port it, but the court took time to magas%
both settee together, proceeded to make the road ordered Nut Paths at Westminster.—Before Mr. Baron Platt and at:mimeo
by the quarter session,. But that road was now complained Jury,
of on the ground that in violation of the order of sessions BULL v. RANEEN.—Taovat.--Tbia was an action to
the road had been constructed at • considerable distance recover the value of certain property, consisting of a grand
from the railway station, instead of close to it. A fence had pianoforte, gold watch and chain, desk, amethyst cross, and
been erected on the site of the station by which the omnibus other articles, which the plaintiff stated belonged to his de-
and arriagesof Mr. Botham were unable to approach the eta cowed wife, but which were detained by the defendant, his
lion, the oobbject being to keep him therefrom, and to give mother-in-law. The ease occupied the court for two days,
all the traffic to another innkeeper. Under the present state and although the fade and evidence were rather of a volutni-
of things, it Mr. Betharn wished to obtain passengers, he must cons and c .ntrad.ctory nature, the main features oa the case
stand outside the fence and hail them, at the same time ask- may be noted briefly. The defendant, who is a widow
swum vies. Chancellor WW2= ing them to walk round a quarter of a mile to hisearriages. The lady of property, residing at St. John's. wood, some
Ctiewarri e. FlRLDlNG.—Eiwnixitewr.—ln this cattle landlord of the Rutland Arms, however, was able to come years ago lived with her two daughters in the
the principal question depended on the consent. lion to be close to the station. The learned counsel submitted that neighbourhood of Vauxhall, with her mother, a lady
given to aparticular clause in a settlement of certain trust there had been a violation of the order of sessions, and there- of the name of Davies. The family of the plaintiff
funds ae in 1832 by Mr. Mario Clementi for the benefit fore he was entitled to a rule.—Mr. Justice Patteson wished who has been a stationer, and was for some time connected
of his family. The settlement, after directing the sum of to know why these parties could not be inalieted.-131r F. with the Naral and Military Gaze*, but who has mon
12,0001. to be raised out of the fond in the event of Mr. Thesiger replied that the effect of that would be only to in- recently kept • tobacconist's shop in Covent-garden, had
Clementi dying in the lifetime of his wife, declared that the diet a fine, but that would not cause the road to be made. long been on very friendly terms with the defendant ; and
reside of the trust fend should, upon the decease of Mr. The court granted the application. Mr. Thomas Bull, the plaintiff, and a younger brother, were
Olegranti, whether in the lifetime of his wife or not, " re- Ex PARTE THE Bourn WALES RAILWAY COMPANY.— frequent visitore at her house, and in tame became the suitors
gain sad be in trust to all and every the thin present and CARTIORARI.—Sir Fitzroy Kelly moved for a certiorari to of the Mimes R token. From the statements in evidence,
here hoes diadem of him the said Muzio Clemanti in bring up an inquisition which had been taken before the which were rather of a contradictory nature, it appeared that
opal sheave: Slid that the share of each child being a son sheriff of Carmarthenshire, far the purpose of maiming the the addresses of the Messrs. Bull were favonrably received
I should be an Intend vested in him on his attaining the age compensation due to a Mr. Stanley, for certain lands by the defendant ; bat ultimately. her countenance of their
of 24 years, or dyhyta.:tender that age leaving issue him sur- belonging to him, and which the railway had taken. suit was withdrawn, and the visits of the young men were
itsand the at each child being a daughter The ground upon which the present application was refused. In the course of last year, however, the young
be an interest vested in her on her attuning made was that there had been an excess of jurisdiction on ladies, unknown to their mother, left her house and were
the age of 24 years without having been married or the part of the jury. The jury had given Mr. Stanley the Earn. don the same day, although in different diuretics,
en her marrying wider that age with her mother's consent." sum of 221., as compensation for three acres of land ; and, Miss Elizabeth Ranken to the plaintiff, and Miss /dory, the
The question was, whether the gilt to the children of the with regard to that part of their verdict there was no cum- younger sister, to Mr. William BulL The defendant, in-
settler would become a vested interest in them immediately plaint made by the company ; but the jary had also awarded dignant at the course adopted by her childten, refused to
tea the death of their father, or whether the vesting as wall the rum of 2,0001. with respect to an old canal. The land hold any communication with them, and shout eight months
as the payment of their thares was postponed till they should held byMr. Stanley hat beets leased to him by the Earl of Ash- after the marriage the plaintiff's wife was prematurely con-
ing& the age of 24. In the latter case the gift to the bourne, and 20 years ago a weal had been made on the land fitted and died. The plaintiff now sought to recover the
chi dren would be void for remoteness.—His Honour now in question, for the purpose of communicating with state articles above enumerated, which he contended were the
pronounced judgment upon the ease to the effect that the collieries at the era-Me. It was foguil, however, that the property of his deceased wife. A number of witnesses were
Testis!! as well as the payment of the children's :portions was canal did not answer, and a few months after it had been called for theplaintiff, the purport of whose evidence was
PaaPsask and that the gilt to there was therefore altogether made it was stopped up, and the site of it had become inter- that the grand piano, described as a very valuable instrument',
void. mixed with garden and pasture pound. By the terms of was always spoken of se Mira Elisabeth's, and that
Jowls e. Boma.—Evinaxes.—His Honour made an the lease between the Earl of •Ashbourue and Mr. Stanley, she kept theme ey of It; while an inferior instrument was
order in this ease, upon the motion of a defendant, tor liberty it woe provided that if at the 'spited on of twelve known as Miss Mary's.—Mr. Ball, the father of the plaintiff,
to mezamine, in the Master's office, a witness who had mouths Mr. Stanley did not choose to reinstate deposed that in the course of his visits to the defendant she
already boon examiaed before the heariag. The eider was the easel, the, all his interest in it was to mane, had said that the grand piano was Elizabeth's, and that it had
made after the wart had ascertained from the Master, and He (Sir F. Kelly) therefore submitted that, in the lest bees given to hoz sea present by her grandmother. This wit-
by reference to the interrogatories and depositions on the place, as Mr. Btard-y had never taken any steps with regard noes was subjected to • rigid cross-examination, with the view
termer examiaation, that the evident* required did not re- to reinstating this canal, he had no right to have any com- to invalidate his testimony, chiefly on the ground whenug-
ht* to matters on which the witness had bosaalready exam- potation awarded him la respect of it, and if anybody had a eampanisd his son to Doctors" Commons last year,. ap-

pekes the Moe -Macaw' of England.
RAWLINOB 0. M'MAROM.—ADMINISTRATION TO AN
ESTATS ix ANTIGUA —in this sus it appeared that e.g.'s,
Osman named Wm. Wharton Rawlings, on his marriage,
covenanted to charge a certain real estate in Antigun, con-
sisting wholly of mane, with the payment of 12,0001. Un-
der the trusts of Its settlement Stedman Rawlings one of
his children, who died in his father's lifetime, attained a
vested interest in a share. David Rawliop, one of the
plaintiffs in the suit, had obtained administration in Antigua
to the estate of Stedman. After his death a sum of money
was transferred Into the names of trustees in Ragland, by
the commissioners for slave compensation, and that sum was
the only money ultimately capable of being received to satisfy
the trusts of the settlement. It did not appear where Sted.
man died, nor where the instrument by which William Raw-
lings covenanted to charge the property was.—Mr.Ragshawe,
janior, fur the trustees of the deed, raised a question
whether it was not necessary that administration to the
estatv of Stedman Rawlings should betaken out in England,
and cited the cam of " Wight v. Rose," (3, Queen's Bench
Reports.)—The Vies-Chancellor held that the Antigua admi
nistration was sufficient

-----
SHARP O. FILITR.-41NNOITT TO BIZCITTON.II, 111111111
DITIIIIIINARLI UPON TEN TRUSTS DZINO EISCOTID.

This was a maks by rends pumas interested ueder the
will of William Len, dated la Jul 1834, by which the
testator. after Shin several pseuntary 1, poles, pre and
bequeathed site rash of AXIS persons, w were therein-
after named, hie eassederie, the ems of 801. prr annum, to
semearnice hem his death, and to be payable half yearly so
Mei ea they should reerectively attend to sad met in the
suseatica of the trusts of his will, as an acknowledgment for
the an and tremble they would have in exectilag the said
MEM, emd die testator directed them to set apart, in their
scan, he the government hinds, a sum sufficient to mower
re seid atm of 801. per annum. And he directed that, sub-
jsm $ the said annuities during the continuance of the
=i the stock sold to be set apart as thereinbefor• directed
be considered and taken as part of hi• ry widow preaseal
sesame. T woof the trustees under the will had died, enill all tbe
fends left by the will had been divided under the Mule. N.
farther trusts remained to be performed ; but the obanstar
of executor continued in the survivor of the three • nod if
any question regarding the deceased's estate were to ides, be
would, as executor, be called soon to act. The wades aow
raised was, whether the annuity to the executon had deter-
mined or not.—The Vice Chancellor said his opinion
•

woo, that wader the words of the will the annuity to the
executors wee to (outlaws so lenges they remained executors,
and not to terminate surely because WI trusts of the will
had been executed.