The Express.
London, England, 1846-11-26 00:00:00

PROVINCIAL.

FATAL ACCIDENT ON THE MANCHESTER AND LEEDS
RAILWAY.—The first parliamentary or cheap train from
Manchester to Leeds, on Monday last, arrived at Wakefield
about nine, where it stepped for a short time. Everything
had been reported right, and the engine again leR the sta-
tion, but had not progressed more than twenty or thirty
yards,
when it was stopped in consequence of an accident.
One of the assisting guards, named Corns, was proceeding
along the foot-board to his break, as is the custom, after all
has been found correct, when the hide of his head or neck
tame in contact with a luggage-waggon on the siding, and
be was struck with such violence as to be knocked from his
standing on to the line. lie was thrown under the wheels
of the train by the force of the blow, and one of the heavy
horse-boxes, and another carriage attached to the tender,
passed over his legs, and severed them both from his body,
the one above, and the other below the knee. The unfortu-
nate man gradually sunk under the injuries he had sustained,
and died on Tuesday. An inquest was held, and the
verdict was—" Accidental death."
A CASE or STABBING occupied the attention of the
magistrates of Liverpool on Tuesday. A sailor named
Winslow was standing at the corner of a street, when
another seaman, who was running away from some com-
panions whom be had offended, stabbed Winslow in the
abdomen. The ruffian who used the knife was secured, and
now lies in gaol.
CHARGE AGAINST THE REv. W. MOLEswoRTH.—The
Manchester Guardian of yesterday says :—The town of
Rochdale wan thrown into considerable excitement on Sun-
day morning, by seeing the Rev. W. Molesworth, incum-
bent ofSt. Clement's Church, and son of the vicar of Rochdale,
brought into the town in the custody of the police. Notice
has been given in the Manchester papers, by the commis-
sioners, of their intention to apply to parliament nextseseion
for fresh powers, and it is necessary, in order to comply with
the standing orders, that certain notices should be placed on
the church doors within the parish three Sundays in October
or November. On the Eth and 15th of this month, those
notices were placed on the doors of St. Clement's Church, and
in a short time after they were pulled off by some one. Mr.
Molesworth was suspected to be Unperson. The commissioners
were determined to discover the offender, and on Sunday last
they sent on to the graand Mr. J. Butterworth, the inspector
of nuisances, and two of the Constabulary force, with strict
orders to apprehend the person who should attempt to take
down those notices. Mr. Molesworth came, pulled them
down, and tore them to pieces before the police force, who
immediately apprehended him and brought him into the
town. He was taken to the house of Mr. G. Ashworth, the
magistrate, but that gentleman had gone to chapel. The
constables then took Mr. Molesworth to the Wesleyan
Methodist Chapel, Baillie-street, where Mr. Ashworth
attends. The latter gentleman was called out, and the
party went into the vestry, where Mr. Molesworth was bound
in the sum of 501. to attend at the Flying Horse, on Monday,
at twelve o'clock, to answer such charges as might be
brought against him. The arrest of Mr. Molesworth
obliged his congregation to return home, without hearing
service performed. On Monday, the room at the Flying
Horse was crowded long before the magistrates arrived.
Mr. Heaton appeared on behalf of the commissioners, and
said there were three charges against Mr. Molesworth, for
having, on the three last Sundays, defaced certain notices,
and pulled them off the five doors of St. Clement's Churia
The papers were notices of application to parliament, in the
next session, for an extension and amendment of the Roch-
dale Improvement Act. Parliament had made standing
orders that such notices must be posted on the doors of the
various churches and chapels on three Sundays in October
or November. The papers had been duly posted by the ser-
vants of the police commissioners, but had been torn off the
doors by the Rev. William Molesworth. What motive be
had for so doing, he could not tell, unless it was because the
clerk of the church had not put them up, and was thus de-
prived of his fees. It had formerly been customary to employ
the clerk to post these notices, for which he was paid a small
fee. He (Mr. Heaton) thought a rev. gent. should be an in-
strument in tesehing the people good morals, but here he had
acted differently. He called witnesses to prove the faets.
Mr. J. Molesworth, for the defence, said the church doors
had recently been painted, and the papers had been posted
on the doors in a disgraceful manner. They would have
been allowed to be put on the doors in a proper manner,
had the parties first asked leave of the incumbent. The
case was out of the jurisdiction of the bench, as there was no
law on the subject, but only a standing order of government.
His brother had been under the impression that he had a
right to act as he bad done, and that there was no law to
punish him, for whilst he was incumbent of St. Clement's
Church, it was his property. Mr. Heaton said he was not
aware of any law on the subject, except the rending orders
of parliament. Mr. Chadwick : I do not at all approve of
the manner in which defendant has acted. The case was
dismissed.
SHORT TIME.—A journal favourable to a ten hours bill
(the Preston Chronicle, of Saturday last) has the following
paragraph :—" The hands in the employ of Mr. George
Smith, spinner, being dissatisfied with the reduction of the
hours of labour to eight daily, gave notice of their intention
of leaving work, if the old time was not resumed. Mr. Smith
not being disposed to give way, closed his mill altogether,
and as yet no terms have been come to."
A NEW TEMPERANCE HALL was opened in Liverpool
on Monday. It has been raised by the exertions and perse-
verance of a number of working men.

NOTTECCHAMSIIIRE.
PEOPLE OF TANITL—On Tuesday last the NottinghamTovns
Council. at a meeting in the Guildhall, agreed to a memorial
to Lord Palmerston in which they state, that, viewing with
deep regret the sufferings entailed on the queen and people
of Tahiti, by the forcible establishment of the French protec-
torate in that island ; and, believing that this is a ease which
specially calls for friendly interposition on the part of the

Briti:a. nation, they respectfully intreat her Majesty's
F('.eernment to use its beat offices with the government of
France, in order to procure for such of the Tahitians as may
desire it, permission peaceably to withdraw Prom the island,
and also to make such negotiations as may secure the perma-
nent independence of the Society Islands, as well as of the
other Wands of the Pacific, shich may otherwise share the
fate of Tahiti.

ATTEMPTED MDT/DLR.-1001. Rawanh.—The govern-
ment Police Gazelle contains the offer of the above reward
for such information as will lead to the apprehension and
conviction of the individuals who, on the evening of the 20th
ult., caused such injuries to Mr. David Congrer., near his
own residence, on the Holbeach Turnpike-road, by shooting
at him with slugs, as to endanger life—viz., 601. by her Ma•
jesty's government and 501. by Mr. Congreve.

A FIRE occurred at Plymouth on Monday, by which it is
estimated that damage has been done to the amount of
3,0001. It broke out on the premises of Messrs. Plimsanl,
ironmongers, at the corner of Bilbury and Buckwell-streets,
and afterwards partially extended to the houses of Mr. Watts,
tailor, Mr. Woolf, pawnbroker, Mrs. Weeks, milliner, and
Mr. Trickett, dyer.
THE EDDYSTONE LIGHTHOUSE exhibited a flag of distress
during the late gale ; but so violent was the storm, that the
agent in vain attempted to hold communication with the light-
keepers. On Sunday a more successful effort was made, and
the Eddystone was reached by the Diligent tender. There
was a tremendous sea in the channel, and the wind was blowing
strong from the southward. After approaching the light-''
house as near as the boisterous state of the weather would
permit, the light keepers were signalled to throw out a letter
in a sealed bottle ; from this it was ascertained that the dis-
tress hag bad been kept hoisted in consequence of the da-
maged state of the lower part of the door of the basement
entrance, caused by the great weight of the water, which had
forced itself into the lighthouse at the upper doorway during
the storm. Measures are to be immediately taken to repair
the damage.

Aar 'NurEar has been held near Sudbury, upon the body
of a labourer named Foster, who is supposed to have been
poisoned three weeks after his marriage. It is said that
some suspected parties are in custody. The subject is under
investigation by the authorities of the county.

BVROLART AT KTON.--011 Tuesday morning es.ly the
house of Mr. Johnson, one of the assistant masters of Eton
College, was broken into. The burglar was lighting a
lueifer-match in a pupil's room, when the young gentleman
awoke, and, giving an alarm, the thief scampered off, and
dropped upon the floor a valuable timepiece he had taken
from off the dressing-table. Ho made his escape, 'carrying
away with him three pairs of shoes belonging to Mr. John-
son's pupils.
KENT.

THE LATE FIRE AT OtuvEmENrs.—Yesterday, at noon,
a numerous meeting of the inhabitants of Gravesend took 1
place in the Town-hall, relative to the late fire, when the
following resolutions were adepted:—Resolved, that the
aeceral acts of parliament which appear to give the municipal
and parochial aathorities the means of making adequate
provision, viz., the local acts the 3rd and 4th Will. IV.,
e. 90, and the tad and 3rd Vp et., c. 28, be referred to the
Town-Council and the Commissioners of Pavements, with
the • &tire of the inhabitants that ' will, without

...,e earnest , __ . they w.., , it
loss of time, 00-operate for the es— ahstent of adequate
and permanent means for the suppression of tires : that
the Fire Insurance Compsaies should be written to, and be
requested to contribute towards the support of an effickait
tire establishment.

nuisance could be supposed to arise from the build-
ings to be erected. If there was any danger at all
it must be from the manufacturing of the gas for
which the buildings were intended. It was said
that the manufacture of gas would net commence
before the month of March ; and the result was, that the
damage was prospective, future, and contingent. The case
was new in this respect; that there was no instance in
which the court had interfered where there had not been
works begun, and an injury done, which was capable of
being made the subject of legal proceedings, except perhaps
the case of Crowder v. Tinkkr. In nearly all the eases the
matter was more or less connected with a trial to be had at
law ; but the court would sometimes be so impressed with
the apprehended danger as to atop works until a trial. It de-
pended on the circumstances. The court had no jurisdiction
to determine whether a particular act was a nuisance, but it
had jurisdiction to protect the rights of persons from the
effects of a nuisance which a court of law had no power to
prevent. And though damages might he had at law, yet
where that was not enough for justice, it would interfere
by its preventive process. No case had been adduced in
which it had been held at law that the manufacturing of gas
was to be deemed a nuisance. It was no doubt a disagree-
able thing, whetherlit was to,be considered a nuisance or not.
Nobody could doubt that the products from coal were offen-
sive, but whether they amounted to a nuisance was quite a
different question. The scientific witnesses for the defend-
ants did not deny the offensive nature of the products from
coal ; but it was a question whether these products could or
not be so managed that they should not be offensive. One
of the witnesses had even expressed his belief that the pro-
ducts from manufacturing gas would correct other noxious
matters in the air, as miasma and fever. It might be con-
cluded from that evidence that it would be a sanatory pre-
cess. That was contrary certainly to common impres-
sions, and hard to be believed. But he was persuaded
that the progress of science might discover means
of making noxious matters enter into combinations in which
they should not be hurtful; and there was the evidence of
able men that they could be governed and suppressed so far
as they were not made to enter into other combinations in
which they should be innocent. There were, indeed, scien-
tific men who expressed their belief that this could not be
done. But on the other side, there was the evidenceca sci-
entific men that it could be done. Mr. Palmer did r.ot state
the means by which he proposed to effect this desi*.able pro.
cess. His statement, therefore, on this point ,ould not go
1 for much. But if his evidence on this eubject, on account of
the obscurity in which the matter was bat by him, went a
very little way, we had experience. that science had almost
completed the prevention of these noxious and deleterious
consequences. If so, were tliet,e works to be stopped merely
because they were intended for manufacturing gas? Could
it be said beforehand that, gas could not be manufactured
without these deletctiens consequences? He could not
blame the plaintiff c.or hulking the application at the present
time. Had he esloired the works to be completed, Inches
might have beers ineputed to him, and there were eases in
which an ink luodou had been refused on that ground.
Under the cir eumitances he could not grant the injunction.
The apprebf.nnons of the plaintiff might turn out in the end
well greur.dedi but, on the other Land, he was far from
saying thr.t the defendant might not be able to prevent any
nuisance. He 'believed it to be possible. He could not, as
Lord El ;on in a case before him under similar circumstances
observe d, treat the case as if there had been a verdict against
the de fendaysts. He declined to grant the injunction et pre-
sent, but he must do so in such way as to give the plaintiff
an opportunity of bringing the matter before the court at a
future time. He did not mean to declare that there was no
nuisance by refusing the injunction. His lordship ordered
the motion to stand over until after the works were com
pleted.

Before the Vice-Chancellor of DIEL111(1.
CLARKE V. THE CORPORATION OF DERHY.—APPLICA-
TION POR Ft RTHER TIME TO AMEND A RILL OWINO TO
THE NEGLIGENCE OF ISIS SOLICITOR, REFLRED.— Mr.
Stuart and Mr. Toiler moved fur leave to amend the bill in
this case under these circumstances. The suit was instituted
against the Mayor and Corporation of Derby, for the purpose
of obtaining restitution of certain rights of common which
had existed for a great number of years. Upon exceptions
taken before the Master in May last, an arrangement was
made that the plaintiffs should have leave till this day, the
2.5 th of November, to amend the bill. The ground upon
whieb the plaintiffs now asked for further time to amend,
was, that a Mr. Flewker, who had formerly acted as their
solicitor, had been guilty of great negligence, owing to which,
other solicitors, Messrs. Rickards and Cur, had been appointed
in his stead; and that, owing to the immense quantity of
deeds and documents to be examined in the suit, the present
solicitors bad nut yet had time to become acquainted with
the facts.
The Vice:Chancellor, without hearing counsel for the de-

fence, said, it appeared an order had been made under which
the plaintiffs had leave till the 2:ith of November to amend
the bill; and, through the negligence of their solicitor, the
amendment had not been made. The plaintiffs were an-
swerable fur the negligence of their solicitor; and if the
plaintiffs suffered from it, they had their remedy against the
solicitor. Ile could not, therefore, relieve the plaintiffs, and
the motion must be diamis•ed, with costs.

Before Viee-Clioneelior Wircram.
• BLAIR O. BROMLP.Y.—LIABILITY FOR THE FRAUD OF A
PARTNEL—The bill in this case was tiled to recover from the
defendant, Mr. J. W. Bromley, a sum of 45001., alleged to
hove been lost to the plaintiffs through the fraud of Mr.
William Bromley, the brother and late partner of the defen-
dant, committed during the continuance of the partnership.
The money in question was paid into the bankers' of the firm
in 1829, for the purpose of being invested by them as solici-
tors for the plaintiffi upon mortgage security. The money
was afterwards abstracted from the banker's, and misippro-
printed by William Bromley, who, however, repre-
sented that it had been invested upon mortgage, and
continued to pay interest upon the supposed investment
down to the year 1841. In 18:14 the partnership between
the Bromley' was dissolved, and in 1844 William Bromley,
who had continued in the employment of the plaintiffs as
their solicitor, became bankrupt. The fraud having then
been discovered by the plaintiffs, the present bill was filed to
recover the moues, from the defendant. The claim of the
plaintiffs was foutided upon the rule:of lawlthat a partner,
though morally innocent with reference to the transaction
complained of, is liable for loss occasioned in a partnership
transaction by the fraud of his co-partner. The Vice-Chan-
cellor now delivered judgment upon the case, which has
been already mentioned upon the argument in our paper of
the 16th instant. His Honour observed that at the conclu-
sion of the argument he had expressed an opinion that in
deciding upon the liability of the defendant, it should be
assumed that the sum of 4,5001. had come to the hands of the
firm without fraud. To that opinion be still adhered, and
he thought thatthe firm we/originally chargeable in respect
only of the receiptof the money. The only question there-
fore was whether the fraudulent acts of William Bromley
were to be deemed and taken as the acts of the firm, so as to
keep on foot the liability of the defendant, which
would otherwise be haired by the statute of limitations.
The false representations made by William Bromley,
with reference to the alleged mortgage, must in
his opinion be taken as the reps sentation of the firm, and
the receipt of the money fur the purpose of effecting the
mortgage was undoubtedly the receipt of the firm. Upon
the evidence in the cause, and according to the principles
governing courts of justice, whatever the fact might be, a
knowledge of the receipt of the money, and of the purposes
for which it was received, must be imputed to the defendant.
In that slew of the case it was the duty of each partner to
toe that the mortgage was executed; and the information
,given to the plaintiffs, that the mortgage had been executed,
was unquestionably within the scope of the duty undertaken
by the partners. He could not stop short of the conclusion
that that representation was the representation of the firm.
Such would have been the conclusion bad the representation
been made by an agent employed by the firm; and the case
could not he viewed less favourably for tho plaintiffs merely
because the agent in this case happened to be himself a mem-
ber of the firm. The plaintiffs, upon whom the onus was of
proving misrepresentation, had done so in the instance
alluded to ; and having done so, they had done enough,
unless it could be shown that the relief was barred by lapse
of time since the fraud was discovered. There was here a
suggestio falsi sufficient to constitute fraud, and a loss of
the money as a consequence of such fraud ; unless it was re-
coverable against the defendant. From inquiry as to
how the case would have stood at law, it appeared
that in an action brought upon the receipt of
money only, the statute of limitations would have
an answer to the plaintiffs' demand ; and that there was no
mode of proceeding at law founded solely upon any distinc-
tion arising out of the fraud itself, by which the effect of the
statute could be avoided. The plaintiffs, therefore, having
lost their remedy at law, would be wholly remediless, unless
they could obtain relief in equity. The fraud, however,
which had been proved, was sufficient to give this court
jurisdiction, and that jurisdiction being assumed upon the
ground of fraud, time for the purposes of the statute would
run from the period when the fraud was discovered. The
case appeared to be one of great hardship upon the de-
fendant, and he felt bound, therefore, to add (as was ad-
mitted by the plaintiffs' counsel at the bar) that, morally
speaking, there was not the elighhtest ground for
any charge against him. The case was simply a case of
civil liability. His Honour then made a decree directing
payment of the money by the defendant, with interest from
the last payment of alleged interest. The costs to be paid by
the defendant, who was to be allowed the benefit of any divi-
dend which the plaintiffs might receive in respect of their
claim in the bankruptcy of William Bromley.
PENNINGTON V. 13UCKLEY.—CONSTRUCTION OF WILL.
—GMT TO CHARITABLE USES.—His Honour also gave
judgment in this case, the facts of which appeared in our
report of Monday last. The question was as to the con-
struction to be put upon a bequest in the will of the late Rev.
Abel Collin Launder, of Nottingham, by which the interest
of a sum of about 4,4001. was given upon trust to be dis-
tributed by the Dean of Nottingham in sums of 101. and 201.
each to " such unbenefieed curates of the Deanery of Bing-
ham, in Nottinghamshire, whose annual salary and income
did not exceed 3.51, per annum ; and to such as should be
recommended to the Dean by a plurality of voices of the
beneficed clergy of the Deanery at his annual official visita-
tion at Nottingham.
His Honour held that the testator had given the fund to
be distributed in the proportions mentioned in the will, in