The Express.
London, England, 1849-12-04 00:00:00

SPORTING.

TATTERSALLI3—MONDAT.
LEAMINGTON STEEPLE CHASE.
6 to I a4st British Yeoman (t)
6 to 1
10 to 1 The Plume (t)
•
10 us 1 l asuutler
19 to l i'der elm*
100 to 7 Agitation 0)
100 to 6 Utile Yana it)
15 to 1 Lath l3eeiaicn (t;
15 to I Abelelkider
Very little dams es this event, and (sly the two favorites In any
brie.
LEAMINGTON HURDLE RACE.
5 to I apt Miss Burns 0
to I most Mts. James
ta l— Van Zeta 1 7to — Syrup
CHEWIER CUP.
!moo to 20 sod Bir R. liteketere Melody (t and ait e 0)
1,000 to 1 Mr. 2.40.1.0rea John Owner
2,00 to 2 Mr. PAM'S IMO
,tloy (t)
2,0.0 to 2 Mr. Gregory""lumask (t)
1,000 to 1 Mr. w. Coaway's Kennington (t)
1,0(0 to I Mr. Comers (1)
1,000 to 1 Duke ol !Liebmann.* lino (I)
1,000 to 1 -- Mr. Marpby's Dough (t)
1,001 to 1 Mr. J. ,f....tt's klulguire (t)
2,000 to 40 Captun Ha worth's The )tatoucm (t)
2,000 to 2 Mr. No: .r., Blucher (t)
DERBY.
9to Mr. W. Hoards nd Bollneterhe
to —D. of 18, hmond'e Ghillie Callum (12 to 1t to 501.)
12 to tor! Edturon's Knight of It 125 to 1)
15 to Mr. Ali I[..am••• The Dalian kt to :0!.)
22 to Mr. J. r:zott's Cyprus (t)
23 to Mr. ITlll,y'. S.eetheort.
13 to Mr. tiratwildises The Nigger (t)
26 to Duke ,4 &Molar/1.14Ln o'Gruut
23 to Lard W.Lennoes William the Conqueror (t to 500
1,000 to 40 Mr. Jsques's MBAs, (t)
30 Lard Aute's Mother (t to VV. and aft an)
31 to Lead Airik's Debate (t to 13C!.)
40 Mr. H. Min litafavd (t to De.)
4010 Mr. Bowes's litatber to Egdro:e (t to 3314
43 to Lad Eallatail Mayors (t)
1,003 to 1 Lard Fiilmentm's Yew Tree (:)
1, Oa to 2 Bolingbroke manias the Derby, and Bee Hunter
the et. Leger (t)
5110 even on the field opt the following lot :—Holirg-
broke, Onidllit Collin°. Knight of Avenel. Italian, Cyprus,
Sweetheart, Mildew, Voltigenr, and the Nipper.
In most of the above quotations we haire indicated the
moults to which the odd. w, re taken; we should mention,
however, that 1,000 to 40 and 45 was hid to uearlv 2001.
mist Cypnw, 3,300 to 100 ass; brother to Ep:rote, sad 1,000
to 30 two or thres times, and 1,000 to 15 eget Mayors, the
last bet laid opt the :attar ming 46 to 1 In ponies.

lain intelligenm

SCUJITY COURTB.—YESTERDAY.
DEPORE THE VICS.CRASCILLOR or tact %.n.
ATTORNIIT-GINSRAL O. BROWN'S HCIvPITAL, BUY-
FORD. —111111•01HENT OP A CHAIUTT.—INFORMATION.—
Vlarrolt•L POWERS OF PHI BISHOP OF LIKCout.
Tail was an iotormation filed by the Attorney.Oeuenl, at
the relation of certain inhabitants of Stamford, foe the pur-
pose of !navies a new uheme, directed by the court, for the
administration of the tends of a charity conic' Brown's Hos.
pita), at Stamford. The information stated that letters
patent were granted by Richard 111., in the 2nd year of
his reign, to William Brown, of Stamford, entitling hi. to
found and establish a perpetual almshouse in that town;
that the .aid William Brows died in 1438, without having
competed the establishment of sock almshouse ; and that
letters patent were afterwards granted by King Henry V.,
in the 9th year of his reign, to l'homas Stokke, the executor
of William Brown, giving him the sate power for
founding the almshouse as bad been granted to
William Brown ; that the EIfRiII3WHIP was thereupon
founded, and various statutes or ordinances were framed for
the management thereof, by which it was directed that the
charity should consist of one warden, one contrater, and 12
bedetf.ilks of both kinds, to wit, 10 men and 2 women, who
were to be under the rule arid government of such warden and
coafrater, and power sru given of titling up vacanzici, first,
to the Dean of Stamford and the Vara of All-hallows, then
to the heirs of William Brown, then to the aldermen of
Stamford and the Abbot of Crowland, and then to the Bishop
of Lincoln. Directions were On given for the performance
of divine service at stand times, end for other purposes
regarding the management of the chuity. The information
then stated that, in emosequesee of certain irregularities
having taken plate in the administration of the funds. Ccf.
Ws bitters patent were granted by King James the First,
is the 6th year of his reign, he the better and mere effecUW
management of the eturity; and it wee, amongst other
things, directed that tits Bishop of Lincoln, foe the time
being, with the oraistenee and consent of the Archbishop
of Canterbury, foe the time beige, should, from time
to time, revise, examine, and inquire into the
ancient laws and constitution:, of the' said almshouse, and
should abolish and obliterate oath of them as were repos-
sant to the laws and statutes of the kingdcm, and should
make and constitute such good, fit, and salutary laws sad
ordinances as well concerning the divine service daily to be
celebrated in the hospital as concerning the government
and direction of the warden, confuter, and poor to be sup-
ported therein, as saould appear to them good, useful, and
salutary, and to revoke, change, determine, alter, or make
anew, as to the said bishop should from time to time appear
mere expedient, say of them so made, or to be made. snow, ,
ateardieg to the real meaning of such 1-teen patimt. The
information further stated that a revision of the statutes of
the hospital was made in 1674 by the then Bii.hop of Lin-
coln ; and again in 1709, by the then Bishop of Lincoln ;
and subsequeutty in 1763, by the then Bishop of Lincoln;
and lastly in 1828, by the then Bishop of Lincoln. That
since the establishment of the said hospital the postern=
thereof had been largely augmented, and the average
annual income amousied to between 1,21101. and 1,3001.; that
consequently the income was much more than sufficient
for the maintenance of the charity ceeerding to the original
foundation thereof. That the surplus of suck revenues
ought to be applied under the direction of the court in aug-
mentation of the benefits of the charity, and it prayed that
the said charity might be regulated by the court, and that
the powers and authorities vested in the Bishop of Lincoln
for the time being under the letters patent of King James
asigist.be ascertained and defined, and that tho duties of the
warden sad confrater in reference to the performance of di-
vine service might be declared, and proper directions given
for that purpose; the: the rights and Interests of the vicar of '
All Saints is reference to the matters claimed by him might
also be declared ; and that a scheme might be settled for the
future government of the charity, and for the distribution
and apption of the revenues thereof ; end that itsaight
be ascertained in whom the general power' of the Tifton of
the eharity were now vested, and whether it would bo row
is cacti sue the office of confrater after the death of the pow
son now bolding that office. The minutes foils relhome
the ![aster were agreed upon between the parties Win pow
pose of carrying out the objects of the information with
exception et that part relating to the visitorial pow of the
Bishop of Lincoln, and it was submitted en behalf of No N.
nests that the authority given by the letters patent no BM
Bleep of Lincoln to make and constitute statutes either oes•
woke, the divine services in the hospital or concerting the
lmo
mg direction of the warden. enfrater sod peso
oCerellat stimodee the said bishop to make statutes eon c
els iltribeolea of the revenues of the said hospital, orela3
sigeti, did not authorise the said bishop is direct any distri-
bution of such revenues.
The arguments in the eau were esincluded on the 9th of
November, when judgment was reserved.
The Viso-Chancellor now lelieeratiudgatent, and rid*,
question wee whetter under the chant* of King James 1.,
the Bishop of Lincoln was the general visitor of the charity.
It &wand that serious sets had been done with reference to
the charity, is which it was *ruined thst the bishop had •
tight to exercise the inners' visitorial p 'wets, but apish seal
ing over the charter, his opinion was that such was not the
case, and that the bishop had only a limited power, not
rx-
tendmg tone management of the revenues of the charity.
This eau resseabled the authority of the Berkhampstead
Free Sehool ( 2 Veg. and Bra.), whith bad been quoted, and
his decision would be that the Bishop of Lincoln bed no ge.
mend power over the revenues, hut that they were, under the
circumstances which had oeseured, subject to the jurisdiction
of this court.

Dans V!

Higtotrt Bum.

Faant usa o. Baattt—Thi Wz tow BANK BAt.o.
Vila woo a demurrer to a hill of iatreplmier filed by
Merin Farebtotber and Co., tase auctioneers, by whom the
propertl at Willow= oak, beleaglag to Mr. Deladeld, the
Mete. eQ tie Italian Open, is Covont-ordes, had been sold.
Aceordlas to due ettteseate of the bit', the defondamt, Mo.
Book, was mortgagee of the property, with power of eels.

Mr. Walks.", another defendant, also claimed the benefit of
• seeseity on the goods and ehnt.la at Willow b•mk fur
2.0001. Under them securities Mr. Beale, with the '. assent
sad coccuirence " of Mr. Walker, instruct. • as plaintiffs
*a sell the property, which they accordingly did on the 2nd
of July last and following dap. On July 13 the plaintiffs
were served Ph notice from the solicitors prosecuting the
penceediap in bankruptcy against Mr. Delatiald, not to part
with any of the money arising from the gale ; and afterwards
they netted a-..other notice on behalf of Mr. Delafield'a
meioses to the same effect. The sale realised 10,1825. 71. 6d.,
banag, after various payments, a baler es of 8,2321. Bs. 7d.
is 'be plaiatiffe hands, foe which amount Mr.
Beale had brought an action against the plaintiff',
who were also threatened with legal proceeding an the
eft ef Mr. Welker if they parted with the luta. The
geetwess also persevered in their claim, and threatened to
neat= it. The plaintiffs offered to bring the money into
newt and sought the usual relief in an interpleader suit, to
dish the above claimants were made defendants.
Me. ineetal and Mr. C. Barber, for Mr. Beale, in support
of
the de cue's', contended that the plaintiffs were Mr.
Reales 'gents, and were only accountable to him ; and that
they could not sustain • bill of internleader against him con-
tinently with the law, as established by " Crawshay v.
Thornton" (2 Mylae and Craig, 1, and earlier authorities).
Mr. Bwanston and Mr. If ielop Clarke, for the plaintiffs,
contended that Mr. Walker had directed the sale, jointly
with Mr. Beale, while the assignees claimed under Mr.
Delafield, and not by any title poramount to that of Mr.
Beale. The plaintiffs were therefore not contesting Mr.
Beale 's title, but were entitled to the protection of the court
consistently with the authorities referred to. as appeared
from " Nicholson v. Knowles" (5 Maddock,
Wood" (Craig and Phillip, 185), " Primo v. Carin" (2
Russell and if fate, 606), and other casts.
lir. Russell replied.
The Vice-Chancellor said that, accordieg to his present
view of the reeord, a case of interpleadsr was made uut as
between Mr. Basle and Mr. Walker. That would
leave the questions open, whether • case erf interpleader
was stated as between ldr. Beale snd the assignees of Mr.
Delafield, and if not what was the effect of that upon Mr.
Beale's rights ? His Honour's present impression was, that
if &camel interpleader was not stated as aiain-t the assignees,
the bill would not on that account be maltifariona His
flonoer'a impression else was, that whether • case of in-
terpleader was or was not sustainable as against the mignon,
Mr. Beale was not entitled to demur. Unless his Honour
intimated • different opinion on Thursday neat, such must
be considered his decision.
It was agreed that in the meantime no proceedings should
be taken.

Haman VwsZwANCTSLOIWIciAAN.
RIGBY V. USIAT WE/SLAM RAILWAY COYPANT.
His Honour delivered his judgment upon this motion,
which was argued last term by Mr. Wood and Mr. J. Bailey,
on behalf of the plaintiff, and the Solicitor-General and Mr.
Stevens, on behalf of the company. The plaintiff held the
Swindon refreshment rooms under a lease from the company,
by which it was stipulated that the cmipany should give
every facility to tae plaintiff, to enable him to obtain en
adequate return, by means of the rents and profits to be
derived from the rooms; and that all trains carrying pee-
-1 singers, not being express treble, should stop there for
refreshment of passengers for a resalable period of
abLut ten minutes. The plaintiff afterwards granted
an under-lease of the premises to the defendant Griffiths
and covenanted with him that during the continuance of the
term thereby granted he would do eh such acts and things as
shourd be necessary for enforcing the fulfilment of the cove-
nants and agreements by which the company were bound in
the *Finial lease. Early in 1844 the company commenced
Inane certain trans to Exeter, which Griffiths conceived
not to be express trains within the exception of the covenant,
without stopping at Swindon station. Gritfi.hs thereupon
wrote to the plaintiff, informing him that he was losing 6f. or
fit. a day by tense trains not stopping at the station, and that
if the practice continued it would not be worth while carry-
ing on the rooms. Griffiths, however, on being applied to,
Musa to take proceedings against the company, whereupon
the present suit was instituted by the plaintiff
against the company, and Griffiths, to restrain the former
from running any trains, other than such as were within the
exception in the covenant, without stopping at the Swindon
station. In 1844 emotion for an injunction was made before
his Honour, who, before granting it, required the plaintiff to
establish his right at law, the company undertaking to keep
an amount of passengers passing in the trains complained of.
Proceedings were aoordingly taken by the parties at law, by
I which every question both of law and fact was tried, which
1 the parties had thought fit to try. The plaintiff was altoge-
ther successful in these proceedings, and thereupon renewed
his application to the court fer the injunction. Upon the
heerbig of that application the company &eked that
• ease might be directed to a court of law for
in 'pinion upon a question of law, which, it was said, they
had isadvuteatly omitted to submit to the judgment of the
Gan of Law on the former occasion ; and they resisted the
Want:time being granted in the meantime. Hie Honour
granted the injunction on the ground that the com-
pany had been dilatory in raising the question, which
otherwise he should have decided in their favour.
His Honour's order for the interim injunction was
reversed on appeal to the Lord Chancellor, who in
lien thereof required an undertaking on the part of the com-
pany, besides keeping the accounts they had undertaken to
keep in the (lest instance, to pay to the plaintiff what (if any-
thing) the court should find to be due to the plaintiff in re-
spect of the injury he might sustain by the company conti-
nuing to inn their trains in the manner objected to by the
plaintiff. A cess was aeconingly taken to a Court of Law,
the opinion of which was given in favour of plaintiff. Pend-
ing the proceedings at law the lease of the plaintiff
expired, the iejunetion being thereby rendered unnecessary.
The pringet mina was then made by the plaintiff to obtain
the Mead= d*s seat as to the costa of the proceedings at
law, and a rifeness to the Master to take the accounts, to
which the engem had submitted.
His Hewer, ie delivering judgment, observed that by the
result of the passedicgs at law he thought the plaintiff had
established his ease at law; as well as his right to an injunc-
tion, in ON all Wrier of that kind had been required for the
preteens of Ms rights. This, however, had been rendered
unnesseely by the expsration of the plaintiff's hue. The
poistate be decided were, therefore, reduced to three. Pint,
the eine a the suit in equity ; secondly, the c sts of the pro-
media, at law ; and thirdly, the account. With reference
to the points to which the mo'don was address, d, he would
int teet of the question of account. It had beam
onneta that the &count mast be matter of decree, and that
the plaintiff could not obtain the reference upon motion be-
fore degree. He thought, however, that the court had a
diseretire, either to direct such a reference upon mode. be-
give decree, or to postpone it to the bearing at the eau*, es
the ends of justice might require. Did, then, the remaining
question, as to the costs, alter the ease ? Wherever the court
required the aid of an issue, or aa action in the nature of an
lone, it exercised a discretion as to the disposal of the costs
Mime the hearing, " Dimes el. Varty" (2 Phill., 699). In
the present case it was possible that the result of a reference
upon the matter of account might affect the question of costa ;
and he thought, therefore, that the motion respecting the costs
had better stand over until after the report of the Master
upon the reference should have been made. The order,
therefor*, would be for a reference to the muter to inquire
whether any and what losses had bees sustained by the de-
fendant Griffiths in respect of the running of the trains
from day to day without stopping at the Swindon notion for
the purposes of refreshment.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.—YzsTERDAT,
SITTIMII AT WM PIIIIM—BOOII Mn. 11:1111C1 WioangAS.
LLOYD O. HOWARD.—BILL OP EXCHANOIII.
Mr. Serjeant She. and Mr. Hawkins appeared for the
plaintiff, and Mr. D. D. Keane for too defendant. It was
an action against the acceptor or a Kill of exchange for 3001.,
drawn by one Chichester, endorsed by him to one Milton,
and by Milton to the plaintiff. The pleas denied the accept.
met endorsement, and also alleged that the bill was ob-
tahad by fraud.
Mr. Serpent Shee, in opening the case, simply stated the
fees as they appeared on the pleadings, and called
John Colwell, who avid—l am an officer of the Queen's
ratn. I know the defendant; the acceptance is in his
ioseriting. I know a gentleman of the name of G. W.
Howard, who is in the Queen's prison. I believe this to be
his handwriting.
J. Ruisell—l am acquainted with the handwriting of Mr.
Chit:hater.
Mr. Keane objected that this evidence was not receiv-
able, but that Chichester should be called. This was not
the best evidence, but was only a comparison of hand-
writicg.
Mr. Jude' Wightmem ressived the mititsce, subject to
the objection.
The 1,1011•41 then prasseded—The endorsement is the same
handwriting as that elks drawer. The next endorsement
is the handwriting of lir. Milton.
Mr. Heave—l take the same objection here.
Cromexamiaed—l em an attorney. lam on the roll. I
reside at .26 Cranhommeetrest, Leicestersquare. I know
the pldatiff. I believe he is a bill discounter. I was amid
to mesa hers b tM sea if the plaintiff, in consequence of my
b Mr. s writing. I know Milton. lie Os
a Wm. lielibbs else, to my knowledge. He had •
liwep.yezd is Qmseelemeet, Windmill-street. I knew him
when was in the Queen's Prison. I know he applied to
the Issaleant Oaart this year. I was not his attorney on
that essmies.
(It wee hire ak what was said by the cora-
missisaar when ffin.esg on Milton's case. This was,
beeriest, eleasted to, sad not received )
lam his ethnic) now. Re lives at Hammersmith.—This
was the ease fat the *OWL
Mr. Kam eaMmeW that there was no evidence of the
identity of Ohisleitsr sad Milton, end that skies mews's,
to go to the 'try. No doubt his lordship's riling weak' be
against him, as it would be supported by isms whisk ke
would he eIOISIIIi to gaieties hereafter. mai Ye sisal&
tends: a baler sampans la saw to raise VW imam
Mr. Judie Wight's= thought the Waft was weal.
Mr. Keene then addressed the July fert rsdellandankas
urged that it was remarkable that the esussi ti dee OM-
UK had not stated who the parties to tbie Innletallen wen%
but that he would now produce evidenee *Mit would show
the whole history of the affair. He cesaanded that there
had been no coaeideration given to the defendant for the hill
and that there was no authority given to Milton to endennt
it to the plaintiff, and: that there was no transfer from the
original endures. to Milton, who bad given the kfil to Wi-
t= for • special purpose, which had not been fulfilled, and
which the plaintiff knew.
The following witnesses were then called:
Mr. George Augustus Hamilton Chichester—l have been
la the army. I know the defendant. He is a nephew of
the Earl of Wicklow. I have always heard he is heir to
20,0001. a year. I have seen this bill before. I first saw it
when it was accepted on the tad of May, 1848. The do.
fondant was then at the Cavendish Hotel. He asked in if
I wanted any mosey. I said I should like mos, if I could