The Express.
London, England, 1849-02-13 00:00:00

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY
COUNCIL.
_ _ _

Y. sterda7, the Brat stump of the court sines term ended
was held an the Cauncial Cbamtatr, Downing•atreet. The
members of the committee present wire Lords Campbell,
Brougham, and Langdale, Dr. Lualaingtun, and Kr. Thomas
Pemberton Leigh.
Re HARDY'S PATINV AXLIF.TREIBS.

Mr. Hill, on behalf of the pitentee, James Hardy, and of
hie assignees, Mears. Charles Betel and Thomas Walke►,
applied to their lordships for an extension of the p 'tent for a
term of seven years. Alter bearing the histsry of the patent,
a consultation took place between tho members of the
council, and Lord Brougham announced that they were
unanimously of opinion that an extension of four years
was all the present holders were entitled to ; but upon the
conditions that they should bind themselves not ti raise the
price of the article on the public higher than an increase in
the price of iron would warrant t►em, and to give one
mole•y of the net profits during that period to the Rev.
Mr. Hardy.

COURT OF COMMON PLRAB..--YZSTEEDAT.
Sittings In games.
CROSPIELD V. 11011110N.-CONOTIMCTION OP A COVENANT

TO INDEMNIFY IN AN ASSIGNMENT OP LEAVE.

Upon the sitting of the court, Mr. Justice Coltman de-
livered judgment in thie cam. It was an action of covenant,
in which the declaration alleged that the plaintiff, as original
lessee of &certain colliery, remained liable to pay the rents,
and cinema the covet ants in the lease; that by an indenture,
dated 'he Ist January, 1840, the plaintiff, in consideration
of 1,676 k, to be paid by the defendant, ssaigned the colliery
to John Reed, to hold in trust for the defendant, but
In ease default should be male by the defendant, in
payment of the MITI of 1,4781. at the time Basel,
then to sell and dispose of the colliery upon certain
trusts not material to be stated ; and the defendant
eovenanted that be would well and truly, and at
all times p. ay the rents, dm., and indemnify the plaintiff
against all breach of covenants contained in the original
lease. The declaration then complained that various sums
had sines become due for rent, which the plaintiff (the
ee'endant having teglected to do so) was obliged to pay to
Elisabzth Watkins, the reversioner. There were several
pleas, and the jinxes upon all of them were found at the trial
for the plaintiff, with the exception of the third plea, upon
which a verdict was entered for the defendant. That plea
alleged that the defendant was not in possession of the
colliery when the said rents became due and were paid by
the plaintiff. A rule was afterwards obtaincd to enter
judgment for the plaintiff, non °Wante veredicto, and the
question was, whether the third plea furnished& good answer
to the action. It was urged for the defendant that he was only
to pay the rent during such time as he was in possession, and
that the covenant to indemnify was to be comtrui d with a
like restriction. The court, however, bald, having reference
to the intention of the parties as manifested by die general
terms used, that the covenant to indemnify was unqualified,
and gave judgment for the plaintiff. Rule absolute accord-
iollll.