The Express.
London, England, 1847-02-17 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.

Nun Palos.—Belie the Lord Chief Justice sada Common Jury.
BARRER O. GRLFPITHIL—LtABILITY Al • MEMBER or
• RAILWAY PROVISIONAL COWILITTEL—The claim in this
ease amounted to 301. 3e. 6d., and was in respect of the pub-
lication of advertisements connected with the North Western
Trunk Railway from Crewe to Gloucester, of the provisional
committee ef which the defendant was a member.—
Mr. Whateley and Mr. James appeared for the plain-
tiff, sad Mr. Serjeant Bytes and Mr. T. Jones for
the defendant Besides the fact of the defendant's as-
sent to become a provisional committeeman, it ap-
peared from the testimony of Mr. (iarbett, one of the
seliciton to the project, that at a meeting of the provisional
committee held on the 6th of November, 1846, the defendant
being present, the order for the advertisements in question
was given. Aletter. applying for shares, was also produced,
across which there appeared (as Garbett stated) in the
defendants handwriting, the words " Very good ; J.
Griffith,;" relating to a reference made at the foot
of the letter to the defrndiult., and designating him
" your director." Another letter, written by the
defendant to the company's secretary, showed • re-
quest of the former to have all notices sad comassaies-
tions connected with the railway sent to Wm. Is sew to
affect the credit of Oarbett'e testimony, apron bravely ia
the employ of one of the defendant's brother was eanedomg
he stated that the worth'. very good, J. Griffith,," wag net
in the defendant's handwriting, but that of the defeatist's
brother, whom he had seen write them. This witness also
deposed to the terms of a conversation between Garbett end
the defendant, about the connexion of the latter with the
projected line which Garbett had on crocaexansinatiestmet
distinctly denied.
Lord Chief Justice Wilde, in summing up, left it 00 the
jury to say whether or not they thought that the order led
been given, and that the defendant had so authorised She
making of it atthe meeting on the 6th of November se to be ;
bound thereby. The jury, without much deliberation, foo
turned a verdict for the plaintiff. Damages 301. la. id.

COURT OF REVIEW.
Ex PARTS BRPIBOW RS BENBOw.—ACTIRO ♦e MAIMS.
AZAAORDISIARY WITMOUT AUTROILITY.—It Win be

bored that till was the bankrupt's petition to have the fiat
annulled, for welt of an act of bankruptcy, and that one de-
fect in the pc/me:dings was, that an etfidasit of debt pur-
ported te have been sworn before Mr. Hughes, of Llaisid-
lees who described himuff as a muter-extraordinary M
Chancery, nesuch name being contained in the list of the
masters-extemordinary. The petition stood UN er till this day,
with liberty for Mr. Ilmhes to explain the circumstance.
The petitioning creditor had incurred several expellees, and
the bankrupt, who wee a flannel draper at Llanidloes, had
been put to serious inconvenience, by the mew-ogee hiving
entered into poression under the fiat. Mr. Hughes had now
Ned an affidavit stating that he had been, in 1829, admitted
a solicitor of the Court of Chancery, and he was under the
impression that he was thereby constituted a master-eztrs-
ordmary for the purpose of taking alfimvits• thatthe mistake
proceeded entirely from ignorance ; and he was willing to
make any amends in his power.
The Chief Judge said there were very obvious means of
making amends to the parties; but the question was whether
his honour could, consistently with his duty, forbear calling
the attention of the Lord Chancellor or the Attorney-General
to what had taken place.
Mr. Swanton and Mr. W. W. Cooper, for the petitioning
creditor, asked the court to give some directions as to an
action which the bankrupt had commenced against their
client. The seizure of the go wls was the act of the messen-
ger, an officer of the court, which might probably enable
the court to deal with the ewe, u in Frond e. Lawrence,
1 Jacob and Walker, 68.5,
The Chief Judge said it would be better for both parties
that the court should settle the matter than leave it to be con-
tested before a jury in Montgomeryshire.
Mr. Bacon, who appeared for the bankrupt, could not
'aunt, without communicating with his client, in Wales.
The Chief Judge said the GM: might stand over till Mon-
day, and iu the mean time the parties might consider whether
some proposal could not be made which would dispense
with the further interference of his Honour or a Mont-
gomeryshire jury either. Mr. Hughes might also find it
advisable to take the same thing into his consideration; as
perhaps what he might do, or propose, would have an effect
upon any course, which the court might take with respect
to him.