The Express.
London, England, 1846-12-08 00:00:00

7E7c;:.;itii.

SPORTING.
TAITERMUAL-4401.6t.
Thee ir
woo a rood dog of hemp beet* es a ir dthe
bewatiloo. mi sot vlthwat tome dlet mew
Of pima ille It_”emplilia
Meer Nem kleelt pleat, hut m gaga .8"..148 it 1. al 15
MI sal • ft 1, Wain a bet at 1,00 M 44e• ssurfea4l
1s Me Mt Beellowa tho be temmodee Wog to De ;
the Wee won bi i Meese wa/psep. Time me et II to l
14 die me: 1d of Os elerneele. mai the Moe at WI et, bet ally
lo a seal
pent Ile Mester wee le wee tem lis ewer bowleg
alk • bed
from st 4101. Wes es Wag or etT
_OM lielia iffi il• lir ilO "I
me tekoe *re or de oat 'pa to WI ism sheet Net
rele MI mob Meet ffle. 1.440 to /Wee fit Om Om ofteet
Gelemk, ha. bo. 1,410 to MO was big epiell Johe Weft lel,
Aloe pea ere thet the =eke price ; wo debt Mimi W 4 to I
meld ham bete eternMet oWerwspla 7 to I was Awed mite Jae
Dors let. The Ibliornrimr mototime ore made up to de awe of the
10001 :

a Car.
NOD le 1, BPI rim 03

110 te I as dr Gail
age Rafts (1.1

0 opt Join Poott's Lot
—Jobs Daot Lot
▪ Tootrowp
aparoW (a)
20— Plaors
—86 V-1. tO Cobweb colt
y•
Olootta of.)
a— oit ran (t. woo w
100— Losolati (a)
0— Wawa& (e. )
Tattlyy (.0 to I)
0— —J. Arowtoost mr)
N,. bona will cootiose
Gesoetod nee.

DIV
40 Is apt IP Hart
43 of Came
43 Libenour (1 )
43 War/.w. wit
41 Innen to Joia•Illt
54 rt*CLUI (1.)
1000 10 COMOCk (..)
MOO •••• PO plaa Warta. (e)
1033 10 War Nagle (I.)
60(0)-34 Mama! ga (1A
POO rasa Mtwara FIPP.& OPaiLlt
1000 pet I.lMratoramai Projectile
Pet Imre Pre eatil atter Pe 01st

tab) iattlitgence.

LAW NOTICES.—T 1 DAY.
asinine, Lincoln's Inn, at 10.—Appeals : &Sewn V. Daireoo,
pot beard; Tinkles v. Stephen; Fenny v. Watts
Vics.Casscsuom Lincoln's Inn. at 10.—Behlre Sir L. Shadwell.—
COMM, Sze. ; llama v. Bickford, pert beard; Peaoock v. Vernot, pert
Mord • re
v. Buchanan ; Walton v. Merritt t. Dobson v. Lyle ;
v. W n ; Inert v. Feetberstonhaugh; Lane es
Durant; Tomsk v. Johnson; Cape v. Lewis; Attormi-Generel v.
TreValyan.---110ne Sir J. Knight Brace.—Hayne v. Hutt, motion by
eider. Osullo, ker.; Tayior v. Sampmn ; Toilett e. Weels(Fljat 12);
Garbed v. MiMo • Fineb v. Sacker. —Before Sir J.
Peeninatoa e. Bisekley;to be spoke to ; Bidding v. Swot., non by
ceder. Ceara, M. : Lewis T. Thom" pert heard; afters' v. Ham-
mond (3); Champion v. Banks ; Starliy v. Wake ; Shuttleworth e.
Beneougk ; Wes* v. Frampton ; Dawes v. Bette; Wood v. Rose-
dale.
The Melee Mt the lolls will attend the Judicial Committee.
demiesimsan, Wsamineter, at 4 p.9.--Hiddlema evannon juries
—Miliamisla w. Means • Berkeey v. &moms ; Kirby v. Matthews ;
laimille v. TOW; rammer v. Anderson; Client v. Lyle ; D. d.
MEW w. Donates; Meld v. Jones and another ; Gibbose .. Hunter
~.tae . __* the Queen v. Wade and others ; D. d. Sumner T. ?Utah ;
v. Barad ; Wood v. Hodgson ; Coates v. Simmonda. The
Ma mid Is No. 111 en the bet.
iii=Pansk Westminster, at 4 p. S.—Mtddlesci *sea! juries.
V. Mom mg ethers. Middkeea commas juries.—
Tedds a. Shisiti.; Idieesidle .. Hutchineon.
Mesonimm. W _member^ at 10.—Middleeez special juries.— Olen
mabZulart bniett ; Mail v. Ward; Wright'. Haddocks' Same..
; 01111ille v. Clement; Same v. Bryant; Gen v. Lord Curzon;
Webby T. Coale; Price e. Bell ; Bra as v. Atkinson; Drown'. Lewis.
----

EQUITY COURTS.—Ynevannev.
Before the Lord Chancellor.
Clincs. v. CHURL AWARD —.l visteractiort.—This
matter, which was an appeal from a decision of the Vice-
Chancellor, refusing an injunction, was partly heard last
week. The circumstances were these : An action at law was
brought by Cromer, as executor of one Bell, to recover a
balance of account due from Chuck to Bell. The dealings
between these parties—one of whom was a maltater, and the
other a farmer and com-dealer—had run on for many years
without settlement, so that items in tim accounts in favour
of each party would be barred by the statute of limitation ;
and that bar was urged in the pleadings at law by each of
them. They agreed at nisi prius to seta all matters in dis-
pute to arbitration; and the agreement was made a rule
of court. After the arbitrator had made his award,
Chuck applied to a judge, at Chamber., to stay
the entering up of the judgment, and the judge granted
time till application could be made to the court in Banco.
An application was accordingly made to the court to set
the award aside, and was refused, and the judgment was
entered up on the arbitrator's certificate. Chuck then filled
leis bill in this court, stating various errors in the award,
and praying an injunction to stay any further proceedings
oa the judgment at law. The Vice-Chaneellor refused the
injunction, and the plaintiff then renewed his motion in
this court.
Mr. Bethel, Mr. Bolt, and Mr. Einglake, were heard to
• ^- were

day in support of the motion. Their arguments
almost entirely confined to the question, whether this court
has jurisdiction to controul the judgment that wss entered
up in the Court of Exchequer, after full argument and con-
sideration of the objections to the award.
Mr. J. Parker was heard shortly in reply on the same
question.
The Lord Chancellor desired to he furnished with copies
of the bill and affidavits filed on both sides, with a view
to his judgment on the question of jurisdiction.

Before the Master of the Rolls.
BRETNTON O. LONDON AND NORTH WF.STERN RAIL-
WAY COMP/ANT.—MOTION TO DISSOLVE INJUNCTION ata-
AITRAINIT4O THE LOWERING OF A ROAD. —MF. Tamer
(with whom were Messrs. Bazoliette and Follett) moved to
dissolve an injunction which the plaintiff ligd obtained in
September last, resttellieff the r.lerClathints fron lowering a
public road in tno parish of Armitage, in Staffordshire, in a
manner that was alleged to be &deviation from the deposited
Ow for the construction of the Trent Valley Railway.
The plaintiff was the owner of a field its which there was a
Iriek-kiln and adjoining this field was the road in question,
across which, from the plaintiff's field, the railway was to be
tarried. By the act authorising the construction of the
Trent Valley Railway, it was enacted that it should be law-
ful for the company to construct the railway across and on
the level of the road. And in the plans and sections depo-
sited with the parish clerk, anii the clerk of the peace (or
r
the county, it was stated that it was proposed to raise th
road, and pats it on a level. In July last the company
agreed with the plaiatiff for the purchase of to much
of his land adjoining the read as they required,
and in the agreement it was stated that the railway
wet to be constructed according to the deposited plans. In
eon/Nuance, as it was stated, of a memorial dadsadred to
them by the inhabitants of the neighbourhood, alower the
at a
large additional cost, the company determined to
road and carry the railway over it. And accordingly in
September last they commenced operations to carry this de-
termination into effect ; and the plaintiff obtained his injunc-
tion to restr tin them. In support of the present application
it was contended that it was not obligatory on the company
to carry the railway over the road on • level, and that the
company had, as well under the act authorising the con-
struction of the railway as the Consolidation Clauses Art, full
power tc lower the road. It was said, too, that the plaintiff
had induced the company by his conduct to undertake the
works, by giving reason to suppose that he would not oppose
the lowering of the road. Injury to the plaintiff was also
denied. For the plaintiff it was urged that the company
had no such power under the acts as was contended for, and
that the agreement with him was based on the supposition
that the road would be crossed in the manner contem-
plated by the plans. The allegation of his having misled the
company was denied, and evidence was given that the devia-
tion would be injurious to the plaintiff's enjoyment of his
property.—The case stands for Mr. Turner's reply on Satur-
4iar next.
COLEMAN v. E ASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY COIMPLNY.—
LHE HARWICH STEAM-PACES(' COMPANY'S AGREEMENT.
—Mr. Kiniersley appeared to move to dissolve the injunction
which the plaintiff had obtained to restrain the directors of
the Eastern Counties Company from signing an agreement,
guaranteeing 5 per cent. to the Harwich Steam-packet Corn-
But the court being occupied with other motions, the
- was euntiaued till the nest