The Express.
London, England, 1853-01-26 00:00:00

FATAL BOILER EXPLOSION.

fatal casualty
c oa-
OecurrAboedtaifnytiO:ClpOre2;llsesk On Soafturmdeauy.ffi. oFrnorrin:gitt,baengineers.
ewithleahre:dwine
gcrianevale.stotrelty, an
h;!,
b,cOnb bsitet'oe-loan, Port-llundu,
sequences, and the destruction of a large amount of pro-
, perty. The facts of the case, so far as we have been able
to learn, may be briefly narrated as follows:—Soma time
' ago the proprietors resolved to make an extensive addition
to their range of workshops, and among other improve..
meats in progress was the removal of the boiler of the
steam engine, which drives the machinery, to a more eli-
gible site in the northwestern corner of the back court.
Here it was fitted up, with an addition of nine feet to its
former dimensions; and on Friday night the furnace was
kindled, in order to test it prior to its being brought into
daily operation. We understand that this preliminary
experiment was attended with perfect success, and the
boiler was left all night in chale of a private watchman er
labourer, who received instructions to get up the steam by
five o'clock the succeeding morning. At the above hour
the inhabitants in the vicinity of the premises were
awakened from their slumbers by a terrific crash, as if
several heavy pieces of ordnance had been discharged
simultaneously; and ao sooner had the cause of the strange
noise boss astertained than the entire neighbourhood was
pleased date the most intense excitement and alarm. In-
formatics dike ostastrophe was immediately sent to the
Com:adds= Felismoffies, when the officiating 'Mumma:
despatched a megeant and three constables to the spot.
The Ara spectacle which presented itself to that whom
the alarm had summoned to the scene of the calamity wee
the total dilapidation of the house in which the boiler had
been erected, but =subsequent examination it was found.
that the damage had not been exclusively confined to that
locality. All anxiety was, however, centred ill the fate
of the labourer, who was known to have been the only
person in the premises at the time the diesster mune&
By the united exertions of several labourers who were
promptly set to work, the mutilated remains of the ill-
fated fireman (with the furnace shovel clenched is his
hands) were in a short time dug from the ruins, con-
veyed to the lease of his brother-in-law in the immediate
vicinity, amis idler being examined by a physician, were
ultimately remmed le his own house ialCarriek-strmt. The
melancholy ciesamelaseire connected with his untimely
death are painfully aggravated by the fact, that the de-
awed (whose acme wee John 111'llinnon) has left a young
widow and two children totally =provided for.
Some idea of the tremendous force of the explosion may
be imagined when we state that, besides the damage sus-
tained as above mentioned, a two-stery shed, situated in the
middle of the beck mart, was blown into ruins, while all
the projectioes—such as window sills, tunes, de., of a new
four-storey building to the rear of the boiler-house--
were uprooted and displaced. The slam of the windows
Of a workshop is proems of erection an a distant part of
the court were else riddled as if by a shower of gape shot.
The cause of the expiation is yet a mystery, although
suspicions me entertained that the valve was un-
dulyn loaded the previous night ; but it were needless to spe-
culate on the real origin of the accident, as we understand
that it has been remitted to two persons of skill to investi-
gate the whole circumstances of the case, and to report to
the sheriff on au early day. It was very providential that the
explosion did not take place half an hour later, when the
whole wriyiloyils of the establishment would have been
engaged in the premises, and the consequences mast have
proved infinitely more disastrous than those we have re-
corded.—North fraisA Moil.

RAILWAY ACCIDEff2.—On Saturday evening a se-
rious accident occurred on the Edinburgh and Glasgow
Railway, which, though very happily unattended with fatal
consequences, might have, through a slight deviation in the
circumstances, turned out a fell catastrophe. As the 8.30
p.m. train from Edinburgh to Glasgow was approaching
the Falkirk tunnel, the axle of one of the carriages had
given way. The guards and those in charge instantly felt
that there was a mishap, as the obstruction almost immedi-
ately forced the train off the line, with the exception of the
engine and a luggage van. One guard leapt front kis place
while the train was in motion, and was stunned and turaell
over on reaching the ground, but the remaining guard wit h
great presence of mind, held on and actively applied his bree.k
until the carriages, the connecting link with the engine Ali,-
lag of course snapped, were brought and very roughly 'AI a
stand, one being overturned on the bank, and the passengers
subsequently extricated through the window. This g Gard,
wbo kept his place, knowing that the 8 30 p.n. train. from
Glasgow to Edinburgh was due at that point, Lad no
sooner gained the ground than he ran forward With the
danger signal or red lamp, and it was fortunate bis did, se
the engine-drivers and guards of the Glasgow train, ad-
vancing quickly, descried the signal, and were enabled to
arrest that train just in time. Happilyon thiaoesasion, the
Glasgow traia wet flee minutes behind its time, and that
interval, by the Gaseous efforts of the above guard of the
Edinburgh train, had averted any collision with the wreck
'of the latter. Those in charge of both trains thus brought
to a stand still, exerted themselves to repair the accident
and forward the passengers to their restoective destinations.
This was done by dividing the carriages of the Glasgow
and uninjured train, and sending the one•half to Glasgow
and the other to Edinburgh, with the passengers going
west and east, who reached Glasgow and Edinburgh about
two hours after the regular period of the arrival of the 8.30
p.m. trains.—Calodonien Mercury.

Lam intelitynce.

EQUITY COUItTS.-YESTERDAT.
ron•am Tici.twoocau,.. ke.sramar.

VtTKI r. PLTUR..-FAIIIILY SITILSIMITS.-STATUTI

OS LIMITATIONS.

This ease was argued during several days at the tem-
Mincemeat of last tare, and judgment was reserved.
The Vise Chancellor now delivered his opinion at very
great' length, going through a numbet of deeds which had
been ezecund a the faintly of Lord Petre for the last 60
years—the question Wise whether certain leasehold tithes,
which hail always been considered to have been included
In a deed of settlement dated in the year 1788, and bad
pawed under the trusts of that deed, were really included
In such settlement. It appeared that the Right Hon.
Catherine Lady Stourton, widow of the seventh Lord
l'etre, by her will, dated in 17.53, had devised and be-
queathed various estate', including certain leasehold
tithes belonging to the rectory of Drayton, in Yorkshire,
held fur lives renewable for ever,to trustees to be settled upon
her grandson Hebert Edward, the ninth Lord I'etre, for
life, with remainder to his younger sons, as he should by
deed or will appoint, and, in default of appointment, to
such younger sons in tail male. In 1788 the ninth Lord
Petre, upon hi. second marriage, induced his son George
Wiliam to join with him in settling these estates upon
trust, to secure a jointure to his intended wife, and then fur
his first and other eons in tail male, with an ultimate re-
m tinder to his own right heirs in fee. The leasehold
tithes in queetion, which amounted in value to about 6001.
pee annum, hail been enjoyed ever seine the period of the
above settlement in 1788. in pursuance of the trusts of that
deed ; but, it having been lately supposed that this
leasehold property was not included, and was
not intended to be included in such settlement,
a bill was filed by the representative of the
younger son of the ninth Lord Petit, for the purpose
of obtaining possession of the property, and fraud was
alleged against many of the patties concerned in the trans-
act:on, all of whom were long since dead.
The defendant, who was Lady Peter, the widow of the
eleventh Lord Peter, alleged that it had been the intention
of the parties that these leaseholds should be included in
the settlement of 1788; that no fraud whatever could be
proved ; and that the plaintiff was precluded from setting
up this claim by the statute of limitations.
His Honour said he was of opinion that it was the icten-
tion of the parties to the transaction of 1788 to include the
leasehold tithes in question, and that there were words in
that settlement sufficiently general to comprise them ;
but he did not think it necessary to decide that
question, because the plaintiff was precluded from claiming
under the statute of limitation's. it had been argued
this the time limited by that statute did not run where
there was any fraud. In his opinion there was no pretence
whatever ter bolting that any fraud saluted; and he did
not think that after the property had been enjoyed for so
many years under that deed, there was any pound
for Sling this bill. He should, therefore, dismiss the bill,
with costs.

BAIL COURT.—YiSTARDAY.
eirrnwe a BAPCO.—Boon US. Jost Ica FALS.
Tim Qua= v. MIATILN AND SWAIM—CALI

TOMATION.

Mr. Cowling moved for a rule nisi calling on two persons,
of the names of Martin and Swayle, to show cause why a
criminal information should not be Mad against them for
altering, or allowing to be altered, certain names contained
in two books, called the poor-rate books, of the town►hip of
Boroughbridgii, in Yorkshire, and which books were under
their control. It appeared that the persons in qusition were
overseers of the pariah, and the present application was
made on behalf of a person called;Stable. On the 13th
January last, a meeting was held for the purpose of
considering the question of a church rate, at which it was
proposed by one party that a rate of 3id. in the pound
should be declared, and by another party that it should
only be half a farthing in the pound. A poll took place
on the nest day, sad on the 17th inst., and it was then
discovered that some of the names had been altered, in con-
sequence of which the parties whose names had been tam-
pered with were rejected when they came to vote. There
was an affidavit to show that one book was kept by Martin
and the other by Swayle, and that previous to the 16th
January the alteration complained of had not been made.
Rule nisi.

COURT OF

FAN. 24.

etrruius ul 1
818 w 111. TI. DANZ OF ENOI

INSPICT VMDIR 111141 ACT.
Is this case a rule nisi bad been obtained for the plaintiff
miler the 42nd section of the new Patent Act (l 5 & 18
83), calling on the defendants to show cause why
Iti= not be permitted,:in company with three scien-
tific to inspect a pageiag machine now in use at
ihe Beak ef d, an which he alleged to be an in-
Mrief lastest.
evill, with whom was Yr. Webster, now showed
=and stated that the plaintiff had already been al-
with two witnesses, to inspect the machine; and the
Dinh ef Eogland denied that they had in their paladin
an use any machine which infriapd the plaintiff s
The machine which they had la use was invented rtliat
latellit. Oldham in 1844, the dm *MI engineer Is the
Bank Csad although he amthwasi M *aka and sell the ler
shine Mess 1844 to 11351, no semplabet had ben mods W
the glidatUf against abs Bank ihir any Awl ledbiasemeut
M his rights. In November, 1861, Mr. Mani aid, and
be the following month the plaintiff mussel b setiou
qui.at the Bank. The Court ef Chsassey wand net have
allowed the present application is impost, awl it mar sub-
mitted by the learned enamel that the rube ought Se be
discharged, on the ground that the plaintiff bad already
been permitted reimpose the machine, and was not waded
to aaother inspection.
Mr. Sliaw add:wised the court in puma Is lewd of the
rule.
The court were of opinion that the pleiatigba asitelhawa
any special reason for being allowed sessadisimestise, sad
the rule must, therefore, be discharged.
Hale discharged.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.-TEITEIDAT.
Immo@ v Ilasos.—Prosa Cam Immo loans Va. 'runes
_ avast ?la. Jlllll/WS Curwau, MID MI. !mien Wruxuss.

Lin r.—kloois.—Disomutoi MID= run Istoirees
ACT.
This was an intim upon a bill of sultan= M.,
dated the Sib May, leg, Omni
the defesdant, and endseasil se the pieistldL 2t++
defendant pleaded that he bed been Mesberged hew
liability upon the bill by the Lushest Ilesten' Court,
and the question was, whether be bed se ibeerited the bill
la his sehedule u to ankle his le est up Ms dishier
spied the plaintiff's dam. TM seems is the L... $w
wen. Mut it was stated se be he NI. Wised MIK, end it
wee mead to be in the bee& of the drawn, whim be bad
Js bet mistimed it. The ashedeat said that be had sc-
opes& the bill, with sum eases, es Ms resideues, sear Lan-
earima, although it was dimmed to bile s Ahlisea4errace,
Meederhill, whore be bed nailed he a awn tine with
Mead, seabed Danish; gni the *Miff seed a whose,
win stated that bias* the pleitWfasgetielettbe MMus
earl at Addison-tense, end maw a lib= be wh•
doped to be Captain Heel" Ohs and silted
bits it isscoseteese wee in his bendwrilimik led Mid bin
tbt tbe plaintiff we about to dissesat The bee•
lbw of She drawer else stated this be was bileelessi Se
rises be was told was the disisedeut, urn the eeneiss
Of witness being asked to put hie same qua re big,
eater that it night be asgesiesed. Ideas el dews vit-
amins, however welt awes peablinly se the inendant.
tonethemaiere of whines wee,- tbthis tries is bill was dis-
es the plaistifs sttur waft is his same for
=amend Where& the MOW to the defendant at
, which letter had out been retuned by the
The Judp, upon this endows, Iset It te the
jery to say
whether when the defeedesi
_mined bis schedule he
knew that the plaintiff wit the balm of the bill ; whether
he knew that the bill was out of the Mee of Catlett, and
whether the misdescription in the schedule arose from
culpable negligence on the pert of the dehndant. The
jury answered all these questions is the negative, and
found a verdict for the defendant.
Mr. Temple, on the part of the plaintiff, sow moved for
• rule to set aside this verdict and have a new trial, upon
the ground that the verdict was clearly against the evi-
dence.
The court took time to speak to Mr. amens Talfourd
upon the subject.

/mules at flue Pares is Lewoos.—Bana. Ma. SLIM= TALPOVID
£5O A Cams Joey.
NICEoLIION AND Asotni• (AssioNNIS) e. Vintage
•50 0111124.--INYALIDITT Of • BILL OP SALE.
The plaintiffs i• thu action are the official and trade as-
signees of Thomas bull, a bankrupt, who formerly kept
the Greyhound Inn, at Greenwich, sad the defendants are
the well known distillers. The action was brought to re-
cover from the defendants the amount received for certain
property of the bankrupt, seised and sold by them, under
• bill of sale.
Mr. Serjeant Byles and Mr. Aaiun' appeared for the
plaintiffs, and Mr. Edwin James, Q.C., and Mr. Needham,
were for **defendants.
It appeared that in 1844 the bankrupt became assignee
of the lease of the Greyhound, and paid 1,8001. premium,
the teat of
the property being 1801. • year. At the same
time he neertgaged this lease to Messrs. Ooding,the brewers,
far 1,1001 awl interest, and subsequently he gave a mesa
readers, rearrialffen le an equitable mortgage, to the de-
fendants, fee MI. more. On the 29th of January, 1860, he
nave a warrant of attorney to Mr. Wooding for 4001. In
the surly part of last year the defendants were creditors of
mho bankrupt, to the motet of NAL, and on the 14th
January it was arreaged that they should advancehim •
.further sum of Oa, out of which 1501. was to pay a year's
tent; and that he should assign to them, as security, •11 his
h ousehoid furniture, Astures, and utensils of trade, except
the stock. Under this deed the defendants had power to
en,'er and sell the property at Ave days' notice ; sod on the
21st January, in consequence of something which came to
knowledge, they gave this **lice' and sold is accord-
ance with it. The amounts received by them were 486/.
for one part of the property, and 441. for the remainder;
and the plaintiffs, on behalf of the cceditors, might to
recover these sums of money, upon the ground that the bill
of sale was not • valid instrument.
_ .

Hie Lordship left it to ete jury to say—first, whether they
thought the operation of the deed was such as to put it out of
Bug's power to carry on his business if the defendants suer-
deed their power of seising the property at five days'
anttee—was it virtaally an assignment of his property;
parity, was the deed made by Bull in contemplation of
bankruptcy; and thirdly, was it a voluntary., set, done to
prefer Messrs. Vickers before the other creditors.
The jury replied in the alinnatire to all them ymotions,
sag it verdict wag Umbra sawed fa the pWatif he

ADMIRALTY COURT—YwrgailiT.
H• rosa be. Lemaisisto is.
TDB lttcHaliD.—Smorikon.
This was a suit brought by she own. rs of the Fair Cats?
line against the brig Richard. The Catalina was a collier,
and on the 28th of September, while on her voyage from
Cork to Shields fur a cargo, she fell in with the Richard,
which was in great distress, off the Lizard, having suffered
considerable damage from tempestuous weather. She im-
mediately took her in row, but, after proceeding some dis-
tance, the warps broke. The Cambia', however, succeeded
again in taking her in tow, and with great diegulty
brought her safe to the Downs. The services lasted three
days, and the value of the property saved was 8001.
Drs. Curteia and Bayford appeared for the Fair Cataline;
and Drs. Addsms and Twist for the Richard.
rho court considered the services proved, and awarded
1601.