The Express.
London, England, 1847-11-12 00:00:00

blocks and plates, for the purpose of producing these imita-
tion labs a; in consequence so which the preunt application
was made to restrain them from so doing.—Mr. Thomas
Parker, for the defendants, contended that they were quite
inaocent of doing any act which was intended to defraud the
plaintiffs.—Applicattom had been made to them for blocks
and plates, which they in the ordinary course of bulkiness
Lad supplied ; but the labels printed from these blocks
were left blank in the centre for the name of the
agent by whom the stout was to be sold, and they
ought not to be liable for any fraud practised upon the plain.
tiffs by other persons. The blocks themselves were not of a
getter value than &s., consequently no emolument would
be produced which could induce them to run any risk in the
matter, and when called upon by the plaintiffs they had im-
mediately offered to give up whatever plates were in their
possession, sod to enter into an undertaking and obtain se-
curity that they would not continue to sell suck plates.—
The Vice-Chancellor said the fact was very clear that the
thing of which the plaintiffs complained could not take effect
without blocks being made from which the labels could be
printed. The defendants, by their conduct, had made them.
selves ancillary to the injury which the plaintiffs complained I
of, and it was no answer to say that they only assisted in the
execution of part of the detention, for there might be a de-
*lra that should be divided into a great number of parts, and
many people might be employed to make the whole perfect.
He thought, therefore, that the defendants had contributed
to the fraud, and it appeared that by their conduct they
were fully sensible they had acted wrong. He should, there-
fore grant the injunction.

Before AhE,Ctukaregor Knight Brune.
BARKER v. NORTH STA FIO RDSHIRR RAILWAT COURANT.
—TNJUNCTION.--Mr. Russell and Mr. Daniell moved, pur-
suant to notice, for an injunction to restrain the defendants
from entering upon certain lends and salt works at Sandbach,
in Cheshire ; on the ground (among others) that the bond
served upon the plaintiffs with the view of entitling the
company to take possession, without the owner's consent,
under the 85th sect. of the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act,
was insufficient for that purpose. The defects relied upon
were, that it did not extend to the whole of the land com-
prised in the notice given by the company to the plaintiffs;
that it was not delivered until after possession had been'
taken; and that it was under the sell of the company alone,
without any sureties.—Mr. Matins, who appeared for the
company, asked fur time to answer the affidavits, and said
that, with respect to the want of sureties in the bond, there
was fair ground for contending that the language of the
clause did not require any sureties where the company was a
corporation.—The Vice-Chancellor said, a sufficient case ap-
peered to be made for an interim order, until the motion
could be heard, which was accordingly granted until next
Thursday.

Rebore Ince-asancettoe wirrant.
JONES V. THE LONDON AND SOUTH-WESTERN RAIL-
WAY COMPANY.—CONSTROCTION OF THE WORD" HOrBB "
IN THE 92/ID SECTION OF LANDS CLAUSES CONSOLIDA-
TION Acr.—Mr. Wood, Q.C. (with whom was Mr. Rogers),
moved on behalf of the plaintiff, the owner of the Royal
George public-house, near Waterloo-bridge, that the de-
fendants, their agents, workmen, and servants, might be
restrained by injunction from taking poesession of or using
and appropriating for the purposes of their undertaking one
part only of the plaintiff's house, or from prosecuting the
notices which they bad served for that purpose. The learned
counsel stated that, by the 92nd clause of the Railway
Clauses Consolidation Act, which is incorporated into the
special act of the company, it is enacted that no party is to
be required to assign or convey for railway purposes part
only of any " house, building, or manufactory," for railway
purposes; but that the company, if it requires a portion
of the house, &c., should be obliged to take the whole. The
defendants however, notwithstanding the act, had served a
notice upon the plaintiff of their intention to carry a viaduct
by means of an arch over the yard attached to the plaintiff's
house. They contended that under the word house " was
included the yard in question ; and that the yard would pan
with the house as a part of the cartilage attached thereto.
The act complained of was plainly, therefore, a breach of
the section which had been cited.—Mr. Romilly, Q.C., and
Mr.Wickins, contra, contended that the intention of the com-
pany was merely to pass over the yard by means
of an arch, and that the damage which might be
occasioned thereby to the plaintiff' e house would
be of • very trilling description, and might be fully
sompensated in damages. If the court should be of
opinion that the question of construction was proper for a
court of law, still an interim injunction would not be neces-
sary to protect the plaintiff's right. The company were
willing to pay into court the full value of the house, to abide
the result of the decision at law.—Mr. Wood, in reply, said
that the wall of the viaduct would pass within seven feet of
the staircase and tap-room windows of the house ; and that
the result of its erection would be to deprive the house of
light, and, probably, to put a stop to the plaintiff's business.
An interim injunction would therefore be necessary for the
complete protection of the plaintiff, as the question of com-
pensation could not be properly settled after the business had
been lost.—Judgment reserved.
DUNCOSIBE O. LEVY—MOTION TO TAKE ISSUES Pno
coNriaso.—ln November 1846, certain issues were directed
in this case to the Court of Exchequer, to try the question
whether the plaintiff had committed a breach of the cove-
nants in a deed of composition with his creditors. The trial
was directed to take place in Trinity Term last, when the
plaintiff made default.—Mr. Southgate, on behalf of the de-
fendant Lawrence Levi, now moved that the issue* might be
taken pro costae° epsilon the plaintiff.—Mr. Hallett, contra,
stated that the default had been occasioned partly by the
illness of the plaintiff, end partly by the circumstance that
the plaintiff's solicitor, shortly before the time fixed for the
trial, had been struck off the rolls of the court, upon his
obtaining a public appointment. The case, therefore, was one
in which the court would grant its indulgence by extending
the time for trial—His Honour made an order extending
the time for trial, but upon the terms that the cause was
forthwith to be set down in the cause list of the Court of
Exchequer, and that the costs of the present application
were terse paid by the plaintiff.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
TEE QUEEN V. THE JUSTICES OF WILTSIIIII.I.—HATE
THE MAGISTRATES OF WILTSHIRE POWER TO LITT •
COUNTY RATE IN THE BOROUGH OF MARLBOROUGH?
—A rule had been obtained that called on the justices of
Wiltshire to show cause why a writ of certiorari should
not issue for removing into this court, in order that it might
be quashed, an order made by them for levying a county
rate in the parish of St. Mary, In the borough of Marlbo-
rough. The rule had been obtained on the ground that the
Municipal Corporations Amendment Act had not given to
the justices authority to levy such a rate within
the borough, and that previously to the paring of that
act they were precluded from levying the county rate
therein, bemire, as there had been a non-intromittant
clause in the old charter of Marlborough, it war not within
the limits of their commission.—Mr. Cockburn, Q.C., Mr.
Slade, and Mr. Swains showed cause, and contended that
as the borough of Marlborough was in schedule B of the
Municipal Corporations Act, end bad not had a grant of se-
parate quarter sessions, the old charter wail gone, and the
borough itself placed by the Illth section under the juris-
diction of the county justices, who, by the 55 Gee. 3, c. 51,
a. 1, were empowered to levy the county rate within the
limits of their oomminion.—The Attorney General and Mr.
Hodges, in support of the rule, insisted that the 111th sec•
tion of the Municipal Corporations Act gave to the county
justices such jurisdiction only within the boroughs in ache.
dule B as was within the general competency of justices of
the peace; and that the power of levying a county rate,
being a taxing power created by statute, must be construed
strictly, and could not be treated as a part of the ordinary
authority of the magistrates of a county.—The court took
time to consider its judgment.
CUMKIIIO O. INCE AND ANOTHER.—IS AN AGREEMENT
VALID WHEN MADE PENDING A COMMISSION Or LUNACY
AGAINST ONE OF THE PARTIES, I—ND FOR TRU PURPOSE
OP PURCHASING A STAY OF THE INQUIRY I—This was ax
issue directed by Mr. Justice Wightmen, for the purpose of
ascertaining whether the plaintiff was entitled, notwith.
standing a certain agreement executed in September, 1846,
to certain deeds and writings. The jury found a verdict for
the plaintiff. Subsequently a rule was obtained for setting
aside the verdict on the ground of misdirection. It appeared
that a commission of lunacy had issued in August, 1846, to
inquire into the state of mind of the plaintiff, a lady far
advanced in life, who had been confined in a lunatic asylums
from the month of May previous. She attended the inquiry
from day to day in the custody of two keepers, who bringer
her from the asylum. After the case in support of dr
commission had been terminated, and some witnesses had
been examined in opposition to it, it was agreed between the
counsel, with the consent and approbation of the pr
commission, and also with the knowledge and sane=
the Lord Chancellor, that the inquiry should cease, the plebs-
tiff be set at large, the agreement above mentioned, whirl
provided for the division of a part of her property between
her two daughters be entered into, and the title deeds of her
property be handed to certain solicitors, to prepare a deed
embodying the terms of the agreement. The deeds were
handed over accordingly, and the plaintiff shortly afterwards
brought an action of trover to recover them from the solici-
tor, who then took out an interpleader summons, on which
the trial of this issue was ordered. The judge told the jury
that the question for them to try wax whether the plaintiff
had made the agreement of her own free will, and that if she
had made it in consequence of the restraint under which she
wax when she made it, she had not made it of her free will.
This wax the misdirection complainedot —ld r.Cockburn ,Q.C.,
and Mr. Hance, now sheaved rinse, and contended that
the question for the jury was, whether the agreement had
affected her title whatever that was; and that an agreement
made by a person under the circumstances in which the
plaintiff bad made this was invalid. If she was insane when
she made it, she had net in law the will to make it ; if she
was sane, she made it under duress and unlawful imprison-
ment, and it was void. That she made it under the advice
of counsel, could not make it lawful, if unlawful it was; and
neither the approbation of the commissioner nor of the Lord
Chancellor could make an agreement lawful, which was in
direct opposition to the policy of the process which had been
abused to procure it. An agreement made under the duress
of imprisonment might be good, if consistent with the object
of the imprisonment; but this was inconsistent with that
object, because it contemplated the advantage of other par-
ties than the lunatic, whose good alone was contemplated by
the commission. The agreement, therefore, was wholly
without consideration.—Mr. Watson, Q.C., for the de-
fendants, insisted that as the imprisonment had been lawful,
and the agreement made under circumstances that threw
full protection rued the phintiff, it would be upheld by the
court. He also submitted that the form of the issue made it
incumbent on the plaintiff to establish her title to the deeds.
The court took time to consider the judgment.

BAIL COURT.
Before Mr. Janice Patteens.
SMITE V. WETNEKELLL CLERI.—PONES or TEE PRO.
VISIONAL ASSIGNEE ON INSOLVENCY TO SSEVESTRATI •
LIVING.—A rule had been obtained some time since to let
midi a pessaiwatiaa of ths hying of W &Landsat, who had