The Express.
London, England, 1847-04-29 00:00:00

ebt Tcama•

FRENCII PLAYS, ST. JAMEs'S TllEATRE.—Made-
moi,elle Rose Cheri took her benefit last night. In this
world of ours, it is too often the case that the benefit of
one person is the injury of othen, and this is the case
with a favourite performer, whose benefit for the most
part indicates, as in the instance of Rose Chiiri, her ap-
proaching departure. This charming actress performs
but one night snore in the present season. The pieces
selected last night were " Les °Metes," " Jeanne et
Jeanneten " and " Lin Changement de Main." The only
feature calling for remark in reference to these favourite
comedies, is the appearance of M. Cartigny as the work-
ing-jeweller, Galuelsel, in the second piece, a part
hitherto filled by N. Lafont, and so admirably, that
none but an actor of a'sility could have followed him
in it without the most disagreeable comparisons. As it
was, the compsrison was favourable rather than otherwise
to Cartigny. He looked the character better, physically is
well as intellectually, communicating to it more roundness
than it exhibited in the person of Lafont. Rose Cheri was
the Jeannelon of this most fanciful comedy, Duverger the
Jeanne; and M. Galachet might well be proud of two
such daughters as Jeanne the pretty, and Jeannebn the
vivacious.—Jenny Lind occupied one of the boxes.
- •

PRINCESS'S.—The character of Juliet was that in
which Mrs. Butler was in former days held to be most sue-
multi,. Many eloquent papers were written in praise of
her performance, and no small amount of controversy woe
expended on the theory which ler conception of the post's
meaning seemed to divulge. All agreed, however, that,
whether or not, the lade was a profound commentator on
the poet; she exerted effective sway over the feelings of thine
who witnessed her efforts. Last night she reappeared in
the part at this theatre ; and, not forgetting that
this notice is necessarily written while the impressions made
by the performance are still vivid, we feel every disposition
to repeat the praises which years ago were ascribed, Ices to
the merits of the actress than the favour of the audience.
The gradual development of the heroism which characterises
Juliet's nature, and reaches its climax, net in the agreement
with the friar's proposal, but in its fulfilment at the very time
when an cverworked brain is marshalling horrible conceits to
sears the firm though daunted will, was effected by transitions
so easy, progressive, and natural, that the violence of strong
emotion seemed but another form of the gentleness with
which it cos so forcibly contrasted. The scene in which
Juliet swallows the poison was given with an unsurpassed
appreciatim of the poet's meaning and the course of
disease; the terrible images that are revived on its being
presented as fancies with which the reason was struggling,
until the last and most fearful one was conjured up—the
ghost of Tuba!! pursuing Romeo. At the panne
e 0 look' methinks 1 see my amin's ghost
Seeking out Romeo,"
the reason seemed to give way. The scene in the garden, how-
ever, was to us more fascinating. The grace of gesture, the rich
and varied tones of the voice, the touching 1311C110611i011 of
moods, the singular combination of child and woman, ap-
pealed alike to the antes, the affections, and the under-
standing. This performance places Mrs. Butler in a line
with the foremost of modern actresses; capable alike of
terrible energy and deep tenderness, illustrating either sen•
timent by the most sagacious by-play, and filling up the
details of personation with a care equally unre-
mitting, comprehensive, and imperceptible, she would
seem equal to
Mr. Creswick -
firm two acts ei,
i not his tenderness,
acts, however. •
death, he sho
scene in the '

of all praise.
nary to speak.
they cannot r
Butler was'

foramina, ie._
most animated

nal to any part and worthy of any author.
wick was the Romeo. Of his performance in the
acts we cannot speak in terms of • raise ; we like
nderness, nor his lovesickn. • I
ever, in the passages of . • !(-71,..441:4
showed himself an accom tt. 1 '
he third act, that in the •W! • 1.116 46//kftlaes,
Ise. Of the rest of the • it is maisig
Wilke
eak. They who do their 15 1„.
sot avoid, are entitled to • l'"'"
as led on by Mr. Creawic • T","'t
• and responded, apparels- , '
anted applause. ' 111/41fart.'.:,
nd X d

N

-

lain Enttllfetna.

EQUITY COURTS.
Before the Lard Chancellor.

CLERICAL.
Toe wow ewer,. or litsu's Cwt., Sr. PAin, Yorkshire, has basil
comennad by the Bishop of Ripuo.
OarOlarsiorta.—By the liishop of Antitros. At. 210.‘bcn Le ad.
mined to holy orders: Damns J. R. Itunni ; P. A. Pruett ;
E. Roach By the Lord nithap of Gartni, in the cathedral of
Georgo-Sows, oa St. Matthias' day, 184:, when O. J. Straker was or-
dained &MO&
PaarrraararrTS.—Tter.B.P.Carlyle, to ttaderwerth, V. as Great Shur-
&neon C., Giciocestirshire; 2951. with residence: pst., J. E. Viner,
kaq. Raw. lialkinaOri, to St. Margaret, P.C. to St. Nicholu, P.C.,
Lyon, Nerfoth, M. Norwich ; 1381.: pat., D. and C. of Norwich.
Res. A. 11. Hobart, to (50thorpe it., Lincolnshire, dia. LOAM;
9781.: pat., C. J. PM°, EM. Rev. R. T. Jenkins, to lidydrirn, V. le
Llsneibandel Abercoisln C., Carnurtherwthire, dlo. St. David's; 1201.
with reekkoce : pat, the Bishop David's. Res. J. Jollands,
Ilsallawasid V., Cambridgeshire, die. Ely; 5501. with radtkoce: pat„
C. Ilisehell, Yoe. Rae. 1. Sharpe, to Cootie Eaton R., Wilt" did.
Gloomier sad Bridal; 8331. with midence pat., Res. E. Goddani.
Raw. U. L. Wlstam to Bexhill C., Sum:, dio. Chichester.

NAVAL.
Wootsneit, Ann.!!.—Dragon, st-slonp, latterly employed in the
re pronsios sondem, arrived here this morning from Portunouth.
tier commander (Capt. Meanly:, who W. dratted from hi+ own
reward, the tremble. st-f., for temporary service in the Dragon,
will rename the command of the former vessel. anal Capt.
Hall will take the command of the Drag Aorphion, "maw
et...f. (36), Lieut. Sibbald, will, it is enpreted, he taken out of dock
to-cnorrow, and the Blenheim (55) will be aguiu docked, as some
accident boa happened to her erre,. propeller. Trident, et..v.,
Riese, was towed to Deptford on Monde) lir the Monkey to bedecked.
Sharpshooter. Iron at-e., was docked CM Moenlay to have her knee
taken off by the danghtaman. When she Is done with, the Sharp-
shoat, (t.er sister boat, but of wool) will ohm be docki Swaa,
cutter, fitted foes floating church, has been docked and thoroulhip
repaired. She G cow in the hoin, and will resume h. r station so a
chapel ship Are the name!, between Mugaby's Mole and Gravesend.
Orders have been transmitted to the Ordnance authorities fee
eupp)y of 760 mealuits and bayonet!, for the use of tee Royal Dock.
yard Parr,len here. The drills in some companies have already com-
menced, and will be general in a few day,

MILITARY.
A Onearanv cr Tars 40v n Roar., under the oomman I of Capt. Leslie,
which iLIA beenetattnned in Wolecilumpton for theta... three month%
kit on Tuesday for Hull. Their removal fret Wolverhampton ,was
owing to tbe distuthance created by nix of the men at a patatic-bottee
in ths abate town, a few weeks since. The men were /subsequently
tried by a court-martial, md on Monday last were conveyed ai the
headianters st W eeden, to await th.• promulention of t►e tenses.
A °Gummy of the same r. gb, under the command of Capt. ToLd, has
arrived in Woireriumpton from We don.

SPORTING.
CHEIBTI.II RACE...l.—llama'. (c_ -
Smart of 0 saes. seeh, with 50 added by the
Greed Wad,
_. heat.. 1 mils sad • halt (7 subs).
Mr. Bebolierkers Tammy Moore, let 310...(Tsespleman)
Mr. T. Owes Buttertan. ist.lold (Styclic I
Mr. R. Minor's Ilawkatone, Est 11th
Mr. B. Grere's Curb.chidn, 7st 10th E. Edwards)
Lord Chesteellsid's b f by Dm John, out of Arschne,
sat 7lb Crouch) 2 odr
Mr. IL Murlsoffs Lord George. fort lief. (Keeps) 00 dr
m Mr. W. Jee's Smuggler bill, 7rt 13. b (Marlow) 3dr
The second heat was wen by a head—the others cleverly.
LATEST DIPPING (IN TtIRSDAY MOUT.
Comm Cur.-3 to 1 apt Mendicant, 7it I agst The Lamb, 6to 1
apt Debit (t), IS to 1 mpg Erin-gothragh, 11 to I apt Mickey Free
t), 10 ft 1 sot bffssrltreas, 25 to 1 apt Newcourt, SO to 1 apt
SO toil apt Camera Obscure, 40 to I apt Pal, 40 to 1 apt
Cleniewif
Deasv.-6 to 1 egg Coareeklt), 6 to 1 seat Tea Tromp, 7 to 1 .pt
C 111 le 1 apt Wsnota, 20 1 apt Mr. Mate, 13 to 1 opt
7=21 IM.
Cams.-7 bet aW Fermer's Daughter.
A heavy shosarleSsea the gmt and sewed rams, and a liberal
allowance at Mom totems the beats, spun out the sport until half.
pest six Widest Thet atleadamo me moderate, the weather
extremely hoistmorte. mg luebeee, except on the two last events, on
a very limited wets.
Tees Cur—le the ally pit of the
.dayi6Mr. Crockford
ground that Itjected. to
fil!Vrigh. 'air& SRA! steo'Ciim an the Derbv ill 1844, white:
although • hed beim Informs ef her claim he the committee
of dm NalMellehe no at Mesmerist, he bad refaiod to pry; Mr.
Cssiderg Pother dined to ban him eumeg of tbe course se a
dandlur. Tbe alms& binds added thint the Imo 61 mild Set
1...g.t. a lbe glausloas se underMscd, that be wee note Victorious des
XL 43111.61Wheniered a formal proton Whiff him, under
Se of Seem ghlogo el the Goodwood wham, which ham
Ishmael to Choler nues, mad by which, If the hone Mesa
AIM In Int, he will maim be entitled to stakes or beta.
Cansena, Wausau sr, Pen o'Cuxa.—Our lart quotation. sees
mole up to Me re o'clori at ulght,st which hour buua.m, whisk hid
Sus elegaisolg Ast, appeased he ham enneluded. It out ether.
• Ss Mosilaist. who at tbe Om monthesed hod mllltbsi memil.
temeligneef thwalse, haring astmosuoly been driven hook In 7to I,
W. Lusk who through/et the day NU been in great tone, lieemelog
Out IhersoriM. Although limedirant mt.... 4 to be quite up to the
mO, t, Ibis .4 beer " seesemset excited no little apprehension amongst
bit MAIM Messy Truslelt of • shade better, but in other nepuls
= Zile ~nevi somaully stated the rate of the market. So
SS mining am geld, windy, and threatening; ltbiSlS
ask beeemr,so the the .Vaud. end before the asiumeeeMeegeff
Se ENO erns al Sit ..M be Mast The elms UM se
Ms Sot se hi omits mud ausierais a eammuy as me hem men
m mom gold ammo, is net to be expected; ommlbeher, It was
bele. TS
mad
von theauged, the malls were eastoled, and tbe
amemiles neemit aid wk the mum IMO ewe that the
remalry fags Si ha mos of their relish for the mart. Ito node.
slellia. beseme, OM the belling of was general, hut chiefly in the
fehlelesile of midis games. The Cup betting in the town this
Meleiliatmestreg verynelmated; all it improved Mendicant's post-
**. aaft as 6to 1 having been taken. but without restoring bet
be lb pemliMidp, The Lamb having risen to Sto 1. Erin.ini.brash
musaholn helm rte, nitheeference to him, we should mention that
the arum& met Shire the ram came off, anal decided that Erlll-1(0-
=WO& silt,fad OM be he come in a winner, he would be
se the Ade sell Mts. Busmen; was resumed on the emu%
Mg MOM lOW biaMems took place, for which it will tee ems* to
met Is tho Om at stertlng.
Casonsim Prams aft 10 soea each, end 20 added. Cup dew
(8 webs.)
61x J. Oevard's Priam. 12.1 ... • .. ••••—• (Owner) 1
Mr. P. NecolPs Rewired, I hit.. -- (Owner) I
3isl au Pantie. Won esur. Ibm in II vela. 11 ems.
Tames
ikCoees. of 200 son., addsdle • Ilembesp of 93 wee.each,M 15 ft
MSI m _
r. MlNEald'e M. Lawman, Mt 711 (Ford) 1
Mr. OaflMlhr s Ws cartes W. „.(F. Butler))
2
Cast Maw" Ist MS 81y) 3
The fliimetsg So rsa—kberbrem Dulcet, Aroma*(
ttheen of
Tyne. Agther, Princess Albs Tom Tough, Mutter Eames, Miekey
Fete. Melo Burns, Pine* Marian Ramsay, Plahmilingh, Cherry,
Mailhnitiog Cumin Camera Obscure, Erin.piragli, Mel,
llait=lieerlemen. Dimmest, Ratcliffe, Lord Baltonn,

of the

O 1 I
I 3 2
O 0 0
O 0 0

MOziLiT IP. ALSTON AND OTHERS.--Oirolia AND BIR-
MINGHAM RAILWAY.—COMPSTITION BETWEEN THRORRAT
WRITRIIN AND THE LONDON AND NORTN-WRSTERN RAIL-
WAY COMPANIES. DEIIHRHERS.—PARTIZS.—Jutusinc-
Tto::.—The court was much crowded with persons eager to
bear the Lord Chancellor's judgment in this case, which
came before him on appeal from an order of the Vice Chan-
cellor of Ragland, overruling demurrers to the plaintiff's bill.
The facts and arguments in both courts have been reported
in this journal several times within this month.
The Lord Chancellor said—This is a case in which two
persona, not alleging themselves to be shareholders in the com-
pany, but describing themselves to be such shareholders, tiled
a bill, in which they alleged that, owing to various circum-
stancea—whith it was not now necessary particularly to
enter into—the twelve persons who were onginally appointed
directors of the company ought, on a day now passed,
to have voted or balloted out four of their number,
under the provisions of the act by which the com-
any was constituted, and to have elected four others
ther plate; that they omitted to do so, and
consequently ere not now a body constituted according to
the act; and the plaintiffs therefore prayed an injunction to
be limed against anything being done by those directors in
that character. The prayer was this, that these twelve
persons may be restrained from voting or acting as directors,
and that they may be ordered to place the common seal of
the company, and all the funds, deeds, documents, and
effects wluitsoever in their possession belonging to the com-
pany, in the hands of six other directors, who, as they
allege, were appointed directors under the provisions of the
set authorising the company to increase the number of
direetan treat twelve—the number originally contemplated
—Se eimbeeen. The result of the injunction thus prayed
weal' be that twelve out of the eighteen now exercising the
lustelleae of directors might be restrained from acting in
that fteaslti, and that the whole of the duties of the direo-
ten akyht fm the present be performed by six of them.
The der thing that occurs to me on reading this prayer in
the bill is, that the bill contains nothing to set right
the error complained of, but there being four
directors who were to go out by rotation, and
It being impseible to ascertain which of the twelve
was M be the to be excluded, the bill as-
sess' thee re ole twelve were illegally exercising the
AIMIOSNIIIIININIIIkes, and that they ought all to be restrained
teem pedbmitin the duties of directors of the company.
The iblef ~ty in the case arose upon the construction
to be pat ew Ilea* of parliament in respect to the election
of diasslamb Bat I have no intention to give any opinion on
the eanstrasdea of the act, because I think I see quite saffi-
- slant M man it my duty to allow the demurrers, without
Mdimilmomse to its construction. One of the grounds on
his lordship mid he came to that conclusion was, that
it aii sett& within the jurisdiction of that court to entertain
ttommdoa, and he therefore abstained from giving any
is • isistase which, in his judgment, was not within
rorialiMien. The bill was a bill by two of the sharehol-
ders, net einging that they were suing on behalf of them-
selves and other shareholders, but stating that
they seed in their individual rights. It was quite
clear that some years ago nobody entertained a doubt
that such a bill was demurrable. The rule had
bona lately relaxed in some respects, in order to
moot the exigencies of cases arising in modern times, and to
adopt the jurisdiction to the difficulties of oleos that canto
helm It. It wee thought that too strict an adherence to the
firm, rule of the coact would operate as a denial of jos-
tle% end leave parties who had a real grievance without
pen*. The relaiiatios tithe rola might net to extend,
never was eatecated, beyond the exigencies of particu-
/sr err; it bad bean only where it appeared that
nab= the mart Mg mesh a souse there woad be
se no* fir Yrs Weans& Bat this bill presented
no Seth ere, but al• mosii &rhino and reasonable mode of
eemenfiles theollesemse of whisk it complained, if each
' ooktoß. woo holm trant intim allegations of the bill null'.
When dm rale we Sine nisi Mthe extent be had stated,
• to awl& swede peeeera lellneseted se shareholders or prat-
' Weis lasheitet themesime and others, it wee eon-
rte' tor are in whist tie seievenes complained of appeared
to he mommas to di ttisia whose behalf the suit
wee inealsial, *WM Sees 1111. 1111111 err a common object
pawn% met the rot of these not named
• in dm mord, al& be well represented by those
' lobe were moored, aid were identical with them.
• Set maths same of "Taylor If. Babson" and " Wallworth e.
Ilkik," both intim male volume (4 llybie and Craig). Acting
en Om be bed there pointed oat the distinctions and
• las ranetmen et the course adopted by the court.. Mr
' whet dm matt was instituted adversely, to the interests of
111114( repesoor shareholders, they could niatall be
held M be opeeneted by those who were on the mord,
• sada, fire voledalight, if granted, be most injurious to the
• latmele of 111111011111111 MS who were DOS repeerotd in the
• emit Ikea ea& pumas meat be made defendants however
nuts dry may be, becauseevery one of them might
hew a ems le present adverse to the Interests of the per-

sou filing the bill. If such persons were too numerous
to be made defendaute, then a state of circumstance.
I would arise for which no nastily could be found in this
cant. That inconvenience, however, did not occur in the
I resent case. In thme cases where there was • common
',tercet, and where the interests of many were represented
by a few persona suing, in such eases all the parties were
directly or indirectly supposed to be represented.
They did not all appear separately, but the court
permitted them all to be represented, when there was
no objection to such a course of proceeding, and permitted
the few to litigate on behalf of themselves and the others.
But he no ease had it been permitted to ono or two in tittle
own individual names to institute a suit common to all, and
professedly fur the benefit of all. The evil consequences of
such a course would be apparent, became if it was permitted
to ore or two to institute such a proceeding it must be per-
mit ti d to each and every one of the persons interested in the
sulat ct to institute a suit, and as many bilk might be filed as
there were shareholders, all praying the same or different
relief—it was immaterial which—anal raising the same gum.
tions in sae hundred or it might be in one thousand suits.
That course could not be pa-emitted ; there is no case is
which individual shareholders not suing en behalf of them
selves and others, had been permitted to bring separately
before the court questions common to all. If there were
persons basing individual claims, they might come
before the court an individual creditors, and in ad•
ministration suits they might file a bill for their own
debt, but not a bill for administration of the estate, without
associating with themselves those persons who had an inte-
rest with them in the estate to be administered. A creditor
might file a bill for payment of his own debt, hut not to ad-
minister the estate generally. The other creditors had no
interest in his debt, but they hid in the proceedings relating
to the administration of the debtor's estate. If, therefore,
there was no other objection in this case then the frame and
scope of the bill, filed se it was by two *harsh Aches indivi-
dually, anal not on behalf of others, that objection alone
would be fatal to the bill an it stood. The frame of the bill
might, no doubt, he corrected by amendment, and therefore
the decision on this point would not dispose of any question
between the parties. But there was 'mother objection, and
a much more important one, to be ceneidered. The bill was
filed by two persons interested in the profits of the company,
or at all events members of the corporate body. The com-
plaint they made was not personal to themselves, but wss, it
true, that there was a usurpation on the part of these 12 din c-
tors acting on behalf of the corporation, but who, according
to the cossattuetion put by the plaintiffs ou the act of
parliament constituting the company, were not entitled to
the character or directors. Their assuring to act was there-
fore a usurpation of the right of the corporation. The plain.
titre alleged that the defendants had got the corporate seal
and property, and they asked the court that they might be
compelled to hand them to those persons who, according to
the allegations on the bill, were the legal directors. There
was a late cam identical with this in principle, before Vice-
Chancellor Wignan, the ease of " Foes v Harbottle " (2
Hare). An attempt was made in the argument here to dis-
tinguish that ease 'rom tkir, bat the attempt failed: both
cases were precisely the same. In the case before the Vice•
chancellor Wigrare, two members of a corporation oom-
plained of acts and omissions by persons who exercised the
functions of the eorporation. They made a much strong, r
case by their bill th an the plaintiffs in the present bill, for
they raised a charge of malversation by which the interests
of all the members were afflicted, but the vice-
chancellor, after a e refit' examination of the authoriiiee
on the subject, mine to the conclusion that the bid
could not be suetained. And as one reason for coming to
that conclusion, he mei that it appeared on the face of the
bill that there existed in the company itself the means of °or-
recting the evils of which the bill complained, and that the
shareholders might, at a general meeting, put me end to that
state of things which pee occasion for the bill. That was
the only male in which it was attempted to distinguish that
cue from this ; but it appeared to his lordship quite clear that
there was a similar allegstiou in this bill, for it alleged that
there was a usurpation of the rights of the company, and
that a large majority of the shareholders were of that
opinion. There vies noahing, therefere, to prevent this
company, as a company, if they entertained the same opinion
as the plaintiffs, from proceeding to put an end to the alleged
illegal acting of the din etors. But what allegation was
there in this bill that the company, who were properly
the persons to complain, could not Ale a bill as a company,
in order to obtain the relief prayed by the plaintiffs
None whatever. On the contrary, the pleintiffs showed
that if the company were so minded, they might do so; there
was no allegation that they could not, and none that they
had been applied to and refused. For anything that ap-
peared, the company might yet file a ball to ask for relief,
anal then there would be plaintiffs representing the interests
of all the shareholders, making a case egainet the alleged
usurpers of the rights of the company. The case of " Foss
v. Harbottle" therefore appeared to his lordship to contain
every point necessary to be adverted to for the purpose of
ascertaining whether this bill hy two individual shareholders
can he sustained according to the rules of the court. His
lordship expressed his entire concurrence in the principle on
which Vice-Chancellor Wigrate proceeded in the cue re-
ferred to, and had no hesitation in adopting it and applying
it to this case. But, besides the two objections to which he
hailnow adverted, there was another, which required to be
well conadered before another attempt was made for the
interposition of this court in a case like the present. There
was no allegation in the ball by which the plaintiffs showed
an interest personal to themselves; they alleged a state of facts
injurious to the company, and the ground on which the bill
proceeded was that those who acted an directors were not
directors, and that they had no legal title to that character.
The question, therefore, was, wh, titer they were legally en-
titled to the corporate office; whi h they professed to hold.
He had asked several times in the course of the argument
whether any cave could be referred to, in which the court
had exercised the jurisdiction in such a state of facts as here
set forth, end where the whole question turned on the legality
or illegality of the claims of persons professing to hold cor-
porate offices. No case had been referred to. He was glad
a search had been made for such eases by counsel daring the
intervals in the argument, because it satisfied him that no
such caeca existed. This was, therefore, the first attempt to
induce the court to exercise such a jurisdiction. It would
be sufficient fsr himself to feel that he ought not to venture
to exercise a jurisdiction of which he could not define the
limits nor anticipate the results. None of his prede-
cessors, it appeared, had exercised such jurisdiction,
and he certainly would not be the first to embark in
it. But, independently of the novelty and inconvenience
of it, he was satisfied it was contrary to the principles
of courts of equity to entertain such a proposition,
the case being one of pure law. There might be equities,
no doubt, depending on the determinations at law, but the
fact whether certain persons were or wens not the legal
officers of a corporation was not a question of equity. There
were other means by which the plaintiffs could have that
question determined, and he would not assume a jurisdic-
tion which did not belong to this court. It was not pre-
tended that this court could set the corporate body right, if
it had gone wrong, end he was not asked to do that, or to
direct a meeting of the shareholders to be held, nor was be
asked to deride which six of the directors should go sat by
rotation ; but he was asked to restrain them all from acting
SA director,, that is, to do what, if done, would put
an end to the company altogether. If they were
wrong, it was not this court that could put
them right; yet on the allegation that they were wrong
this court was asked to prevent them from acting at all, and
by granting the injunction to put an end to the corporation.
His lordship, after a few more observations on the probable
fnonistaueances of lailsizetrcie:ingery othnee,;ifutri!eadZcontielli:gicefitir.
had noticed is detail was sufficient of itselfto peel enthint from
exercising the jurisdiction which he was asked to exercise in
this case. He would not give any opinion here on the con-
struction of the act of parliament constituting this company,
nor on the merits of than case.
. . .

Both demurrers were then allowed, and the injunction
which was granted by the Vice-Chancellor, and 1111 to which
notice of motion to dissolve it was given in this ecurt, fell of
course by the allowance of the demurrers.