The Express.
London, England, 1847-07-08 00:00:00

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

THE QUEEN O. DeNN.—PERJURT IN AN AFFIDAVIT TO
COMPEL A TRADER UNDER THE 1 & 2 Vic , C. 110, TO PAY
OR PECVRE AN ALLEGED DEBT.—Lord Denman gave judg-
ment in this ease, after argument on a rule nisi for arresting
judgment on the defendant, who had been convicted of
perjury in an affidavit by which he sought, under the Bth
section of the 1 & 2 Vic., e. 110, to compel Mies Burdett
Cutts, as • trader, to secure or pay an alleged debt of
100,0001. The question was whether the oath, which was
by the affidavit described to have been administered by •
deptity.reeistrar of the Court of Bankruptcy, ander the
5 & 6 Vic., c. 122, had been taken before a person competent
to administer it. This objection was supported on two
grounds : 1. That the proceeding wu one relating only to a
possible act of bankruptcy, and not to any matter of bank-
ruptcy, which l►tter fact was the condition of the
jurisdiction of the deputy registrar ; and 2. That
all proceedings under the 1 & 2 Vic., c. 110, related
to insolvency only. The court thought that the
indictment described an affidavit on which perjury might be
assigned, because the Bth section of the l& 2 Vic., e. 110, did,
by its very term•, relate to bankruptcy, and though no
bankruptcy actually existed at the time of making the affi-
davit, yet that the affidavit might canoe an act of bankruptcy
and on become one of a series of proceedings in bankruptcy.
Rule discharged.

ROGERS c. BERNTON.—TIN BOUNDS IN CORNWALL.—
The court had, after argument, taken time to consider its
judgment on en application to enter a non-suit in this action,
which had been brought to assert the plaintiff's claim to cer-
tain mines in Cornwall, under aright there known as that of
" boundage." If an inhabitant of a manor, the mince of
which the lord of the manor will not work, marks out a cer-
taia space, or " bound," such as he believes himself capable
of working, aad intends to work for his own benefit, all
the ore within the bounds belongs to him, subject to
the payment of a certain proportion of the ore found
to the lord, the owner of the soil. The application
had bees supported on the ground that the custom was
unreasonable, and that the boumlerer had not worked the
mines within a reasonable time.—Lord Denman now said
that the custom had originated in the necessity that the
public should have the benefit of the mines, and that there
was nothing unreasonable is it. In this case, however, the
bounderer had neglected to work the mines for many years,
and must be taken to have lost the right which, under the
custom, he had formerly obtained. The rule, tkerefore,
must be made absolute for entering a nonsuit.—ltule
absolute.

IN Till MATTER OF THZ SHEPPIELD,'ROTFLERHAM. AND
CHESTERFIELD Ft an I NeUItANCI COMPANY.—AFTER
COMPLETE ILEOISTRATION OF A COMPANY NO CHANGE
OF ITS NAME. CAN NE REOISTERED.—After avgunseat
on a rule nisi for a writ of mandamus to the registrar
of joint stock companies, commanding him to register'Lnder
the new name of " The North of England Fire Insurance
Company," the company which heretofore has been know n
as "the Sheffield, Rotherham, and Chesterfield Fire Insur-
ance Company," the court had postponed its decision. Lord
Denman now said, that after a company had been com-
pletely registered, without defect or 0111116011, and had
thereby become an incorporated company, possessing certain
rights, and a certain character, it no longer portMsed the
power of changing the name under which it had obtained
these advantages. The identity of name became then a
matter of importance, and any change in it afterwards
might affect the title to shares, the liability to be sued on
contracts, the right to sue on them, and all other rights de-
pendent on complete registration. Proceeding, then, on
general principles, and without meaning to condemn the
application in this instance, the court thought that the
registrar had doge right is rotating to alter the mate already

THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY EVENING, JULY 8, 1847.

• •
and that tha tale matt be disebaryd.—Rule
Ht tan v. LIk.—EIQNT or an ATTOIIIRT TO 'Royals.
FEU FOS WORK. AND LAIIOI.II DOXI AB AOINT Poll

ANOTHILII ATIONNIT IN A COURT IN WHICH TRH I.AITHR
IS NOT ADKITIV.D AND 11X1OLLED.—This WY an action for
work and latr,,nr done by the plaintiff, as an attorney, in the
Court of liT.chequer, in which be is admitted and enrolled, as
agent fol. the defendant, who is oleo an attorney, but
admitted in the Court of Queen's Bench only. For the
purr.ose of trying the question of law, as it was understood,
the defendant had pleaded these facts, and the plaintiff had
demurred on the ground that the 6 and 7 Viet., e. 73, s.
35, did not prohibit such an agency ; and, therefore, that the
demand was not illegal. The demurrer was argued on Satur-
day lent, and the court took time to consider its judgment.
Lord Denman now said that the plea showed the defendant
to be an admitted attorney ot the Court of Queen's Bench ;
he was, therefore, a person qualified to practise aa an attorney,
though not in the Court of Exchequer, as he had not signed
the roll. The 32nd section only prohibited the acting as
agent for any unqualified person, and the eourtdid not think
that an attorney actually admitted in one court was an
" unqualified person." That being so, the plaintiff was not
prevented from recovering his bill of costs from the defend-
ant, and was entitled to judgment—judgment for the
plaintiff,

THE QUIJIN O. THE GOVERNORS or Berntunew Hoe.
PITAL.-BITHLIIIEM HOSPITAL 18 NOT RATEABLE TO THE
hamar or THE Poon.—Lord Denman gave judgment in
this case, which rained the question whether Bethlehem
Hospital, which is a royal hospital and a public charitable
institution from which no individual profits we derived by
the governors, the lord mayor and corporation of London, is
liable to be rated to the relief of the poor. The court was of
opinion that the governors did not fall within the description
of liability given by the local act, which confined it to per.
eons who should " inhabit, hold, use, occupy, or enjoy "
soy premises in the parish. They occupied a public hospital
for public purposes only, and though small fees were paid in
the ease of incurable lunatics or criminal lunatics, they were
insufficient to maintain those on whose behalf they were
paid, and were solely applied to the charitable purposes of
the hospital. The judgment of the court, therefore, was
that the rule for discharging the order of sessions which had
confirmed the rate ought to be made absolute.—Rule abso-
lute. A like judgment was given as to the rateability of
BrideareU Hospital.

Nm Pam ar Goluarau..—Before Mr. Isaias &le.
NEWTON LND ANOTHER O. LIDIARD.—Lui ILITI or PRO-
VISIONAL CONYIITREMEN.—T.II plaintiffs were advertising

agents in Warwickequare, and defendant was a gentleman
of fortune residing at Wantege in Berkshire. The action
was brought to recover 4,2881. 6s. 4d. for the insertion of the
prospectusn and other advertisements of a defunct railway
company, called the Oxford and Salisbury Direct Railway.
The scheme was projected by a Mr. Lucas and a Mr. Hub-
Welty, and as the line passed in his neighbourhood the
defendant was induced to give his name as a member of the
provisional committee 7 subsequently he became a member
of the managing committee, and attended several meetings
of that body. These facts having been proved, it was urged
for the defence that the defendant was not liable for any ex-
penditure previous to October IS, 184 i, when he became •
member of the managing committee, and took an active
part, and was a party to orders which were given. Besides
this, the managing committee had provided a fund of 3,00
which was to be applicable to this species of expenses, sad
no agent had a right to pledge his credit when this was
done. A sum of 1,0001. had been paid by a Mr. Belcher,
who was jointly liable with the defendant, and to which the
defendant had contributed 2001.—Mr. Justine Erie, in sum-
ming up, expressed his opinion that the mere publication d
the name of the defendant in the provisional committee was
not enough to show such an authority to any agent to con-
tract for him as would bind him; but when the defendant
became a member of the managing committee and was a
party to an order given to the plaintiff on Oct. 18, and
attended other meetings it raised the fair presumption that
the authority was a continuing one. But the managing
committee then on their personal security raised 3,0001. to
meet this species of expense, and it was for the jury to say
whether that act countervailed that authority. He thought
that the payment of 1,0001. was • payment by the defendant,
as it was for an account for which he was jointly liable.—
Verdict for the plaintiff on the first issue, for all advertise-
ments on and after the 18th of October ; and for the defen-
dant, on the plea of payment.—After a lengthened discussion
between the counsel, the judge, and the jurors, as to whether
the damages on the first issue ought to include advertise-
ments that had appeared on and after the 18ih of October, in
pursuance of orders given before, the jury, after repeated
intimation from the learned judge that, in his opinion, all
advertisements ordered before the 18th of October ought to
be excluded, gave damages 8771. on the first issue, so finding
the substantial verdict for the defendant.