The Express.
London, England, 1847-12-16 00:00:00

CLERICAL.

ELDAD CHAPEL, PLYMOUTH, has been purchased by the
Incumbent of the new parish of St. Peter's in that town, for the
purpose of being osnacerated so the parish church, the turnof
with which the purchase wail elected, having been made up
by the Rev. E. Godney, the minute[ of St. Peter's, and • few friends.,
On being consecrated the building passes from the purchaser's
ownership, and becomes appropriated to divine worship for the
parishioners for ever.

NAVAL.
DIVONPORT, DEC. 14.—Swift, 6, Lieut.• Com. W. Lery,
was towed out of harbour yesterday, and sailed this rooming for
Falmouth.—Manceumer, lighter, arrived this morning with stores
from Portanseuth.—Pitt, 16, Ina undoeked yesterday, hauled Loot-
side the sheerhulk, and masted, and brought back to the dockyard to
be fitted for commlsion.—ltater, 10. woo taken into dock this morn-
ing to be repaired.

SPORTING.
rOV STEEPLE CHASES.-Ttimmy.

HANDICAP ~SREEPSTAEIt6Vof 20 core, each, end 100
added ; 10 ft, and 5 only if declared. About 4 miles. (45 subs, Vof
whom declared.)
MI. IL 11. Janet's b ``by Glenna, list Sib (Mr. Brellierton; 1
Mr. J. 60obbi ad Richard the First, llst Sib (4aunders)
Mr. Jan Mytton nd Marengo, list 101 h (Mr. A. Wlionogh) 3
The following alto darted, but were not plead -Br. Leger, Ths
Switcher, The Chandler, Catrodbik, Jack, Chronometer, Tamsrorth,
goopian, Bribery, British Yeomen, Red Lances, Edward the Font,
Velocity. A fine race.
MATCH 1 200 hft ; 12st each ; 4 miles.—Capt. Alleyne's
Nigger (Mr. Powell) beat Mr. J. Mason's The Romer (wan).
BcLuNo Bream of 5 GOTS. each, and 26 added. 4 miles.
(to mat.)
Mr. Brooke's Eagle, Get
Mr. Dotaklson's Variety, lout 7th (Turner) 2
Mr. Ilarkhamli The Governor, 11M (Laud) 3
(Whom and Moonlight also ran, bat weenie
MATCH; 100, 25 ft; 3 miles.—Mr. tabeta's Slacking
Harry received forfeit Ram Mr. Smith's Rapture.
HUNS &reale of 3 aor.. each, and 20 added. Gentlemen
riders. (10 subs.) About 3 miles.
Mr. Jno. Brown'. Hipbrlar, list. 71b (Owner) 1
Mr. Johnstooe's King 0/the Valley, list 11b.—(Mr. P Wilms) 11
BETTING AT MANCHENTER.—Tcravar.
DRRBY.-11 to 1 art Surplice 12 to 1 art GI, Mower,
16 to 1 apt springy Ja& (t), 20 to 1 amt Annuli (ofik to take), a
to 1 agst Stinger (offs to take), 13 to 1 apt Nil Deeperandion, too
apt 811v051444 33 to 1 apt Bargibi.er, 40 to 1 apt The Fowler (0).

tato EnteUtgenct.

EQUITY COURTS.
Before tbs. Maker of the Ras.

CHILD V. CLIVLLINJUNCTION.-Mr. Turner moved oa
behalf of the plaintiff fora reosiver and injunction to re-
strain the defendant from working certain coal-mines near
Tunstall, in Staffordshire. The defendant claimed an in-
terest in the mines, on the ground that they were perchued
for the papoose of thetpartnership, which had existed man
years between the plaintiff and the defendant, but which
the plaintiff had dissolved by notice. The plaintiff claimed
the mines as his own property, on the ground that he had
bought them on his own account. And the question in the
cause wu whether the mines were partnership property,—
The blaster of the Rolls refused to interfere, on the ground
that no use of wute or mismanagement was made out.

Before the of Reiland.
WALDIOSAVE 0. JetaIe.—IXJCNCIIOR TO RESTRAIN
THE REMOVAL or FIXTOREB.—Mr. Selwyn moved, on
behalf of the Counter of Waldegrave, who was the owner of
certain mines at Radstock, in Bomersetshire, for an injunc-
tion, ex parte, to restrain the defendant, who was a lessee of
the mines, from removing several ateam•enuines and other
haters.' which bad been erected on the property. It appeared
that the lease of the mines being about to terminate, a nego-
tiation had been entered into with the defendant for the pay-
ment of a sum of money for the fixtures, but as no agreement
could be come to, a proposition was made on behalf of the
plaintiff that a certain sum should be deposited equal in
value to the fixtures. The defendant, however, would not
agree to the amount proposed, in consequence of which this
application was rendered necessary to restrain their removal.
—The Vice-Chancellor granted the injunction.

COURT OF QUERN'S BENCH.
Num Pares.—Bdoro lard Demon and a doedal Jury.
WALE! O. 1111.11.--BTOCK EXCMANGI TRANSACTIONK IN
BAILWAYB.—This was an action to recover the amount of
a bill of exchange given far the balance of transactions in
the purchase and sale of scrip shares in railways, in which
the plaintiff had acted as broker for the defendant. The
defence was, first, that the bill of exchanee was obtained by
fraud and oovin ; and next, that the defeadant was entitled
to a act-off, in consequence of the plaintiff holding some
shares belonging to the defendant, or of his having sold
them at a profit, without allowing the amount in aiscoust.
The circumstances were stated to be these :—The plaintiff
and defendant hod long been acquainted, and the defendant
had purcheaed some shares is the Great Munster Railway
and the Cork and Killarney Railway, in the early part
of 184.5. Of some of these shares he was an &Kate*,
and as ouch had signed the parliamentary contract. Having
thus become possessed of the shares, he handed them over to
the plaintiff, with instructions to keep them and deal with
them ea would be beet for the defendant's interest In the
latter part of May, 1845, Mr. Morley, the kriat promoter
Imanager of these railways, desired to give a fictitious
na to the share■ in the Imarket, sad, therefore, deter-
mined to do what is called " rig the market." He gave a
law swam of shares to a Mr. Barnes, whom he employed
hg 1W , and for selling time shares Barnes was to
get IL Qd, par share, while, fer buying them in again,
_ in
, agog ag am up their Tains, he yr M be paid
maem
shave Th plaintiff was, ia Ida ears
altaaea to thaw two railways, ad In idaWras M Daeaape • •
I =I, ask was asatiamisi as dr peat al the failimilies,
IR Ib
iafMsist'ati
is aras aim Tim aim won at dot limis at' a , ‘,:•4:A
prodins. awl ilimas it was asaiwidal pastWl eta
dehogiost rat beams adidad Is iha bloat praufilis
masa dr aipiettlie
IWilibsprdiailka •
daemon of !rand, it yea
mra dr tiff heal . ::* 4
il la the July .
.1

1

P

11%

owing sent in his account, whith he spoke ese I
veryfoll shares as being still in hisin poseasion, cod gave f thteh de-
fondant credit for them, though only (or their then reduced
value, in making up the balance of account. To make out
this defence, the following witnesses were celled
Mr. Service : In April, 1843, I was in the office of the
secretary to the Great Munster Railway Company. Barmy
wee employed by Morley. 1 had a list of share brought me.
only know from Morley that Barnes sent. know that
Waley had 100 shares, and 100 only. I remember Welty
coming with Idle to my aloe. Idle ei,lned the maternal
tory contract. He brought two bankers' receipts (or 100 and
ix 40 shares. The first bought from Mr. Bros—the others
allotted. I have here his receipt for the specific numbers,
The numbers were, 9,741 to 9,860, and from 9,861 to 9,880.
Waley's shares were from 7,861 to 7,960, inclusive. I have
his receipt for those numbers. lie received them on the let
of May. A finance committee was appointed after that,
about the 26th or 27th of Amil. The scrip came
in
on or about the 20th of 11. y. Morley came into
the mcretery's of and handed in a packet of
strip, with three accounts. The scrip so handed in
ass entered by me in the stock book. The whole
et Waley's scrip woe there. I entered scrip
there. In that way they beeame the propertyall the
of the com-
pany. There were there also 120 shares of Idle; from 9,741
to 9,860. I think I saw Morley sign the cheque. One
thousand scrip shares were brought to--strip of, this com-
pany. This cheque was given for these-3,0131. 1.55. Wiley
ealled in July, 1846, and asked the managing director, to
exchange the scrip which he bad brought in for scrip which
he them brought. The director said it was a thing which he
thought he could not do.—Cross-examined : This company
woe dissolved on the 19th of May, 1846. Morley continued

itiktken.
Henry Shearman: I was secretary to the Cork and Kil-
larney Railway Company. I have not the books of the
company in my possession, but they are hers. lam not ac-
quainted with Barnes. I can tell by the books the shares
dud were allotted to Idle ; they were those from 2,741 to
2,840. He signed for them. Wiley had 100 allotted to him,
from 1,431 to 1,630 These shares same back spin in the
summer or autumn of 1816. The shares were 21. 10e. at
per. In November, 1846, Wiley was at the office asking
the numbers of the shares issued to him and Idle. I re-
member a deputation of directors being present when he
cams. He did net ask anything to be dons.—Crow-ex-
amined He asked for the numbers on the ground that he
had not kept an account of them. I pee him the numbers
of the whole of the 200.
Mr. Richardson By Idle's direction I called on Waley,
end asked him if he had sold the shares. He asked me if
I knew the numbers, and went oat and brought in a tin box
with shares. I looked at them, and said they were not
Idle's. He said, " I cannot account for it ; I had 'harm of
my sous, whops I have sold Mr. Idle's for mine." I said,
**Will you let me take the numbers ?" He laid, ** No."—
Cro-s-examined : This defence was set up five or six days
after the demand of the balance. I told Mr. Idle about the
difference of the numbers. That was the only interview.—
Re-examined I firs' knew of it about ten days before, but
I did not then believe it.
The orders were then put in. Evidence in reply was then
called.
Mr. Barnes :I am a member of the Stock Exchange, and
have been acquainted with Mr. Wiley. I am a stock jobber.
When I bought end sold scrip certificates I did not till lately
take numbers. It was a general practice not to do it. I was
employed by Mr. Morley, a director of the Great Munster
Company, to purchase shares—on the occasion one thou-
sand:, at the end of April I bought there from different
persons; I believe fifty from Mr. Waley, at f er 4. 1
bought 100 of Boyd at t. After I had bought thereto became
Impatient and wanted them delivered. I asked Wiley to
lend me some others; I believe fifty. I can't say how many ;
upwards of 100 and less than 200. I did not take the num-
ber,. I paid him for what I bought. Those lent were among
them. I afterwards handed them to Morley as constituting
the toe thousand. As the other parties deli;ered the others
to me I gam them back to Mr. Waley. I did not take the
namben, I think • it is not likely. I paid Mr. Wiley
nothing for the shares lent. I banded them heck in the
course of the month of May. Some were not issued till the
16th of May. I bought a few shares of Wiley, in the Cork
and Killarney. I have no memorandum of it ; it was very
trifling. I bad no difficulty in getting them The transac-
tion was by Morley. I should say from 30 to 40 was the
number I bought from Waley.—Cross-examined I
was employed by Morley to get people to take
shares. I don't think I was limited to any num-
ber. I was to have 2s. 6d. per share. I gave some
to Waley and my brother. I bought them back. I
was employed to " rig " the market, I believe. I had
on getting them back. It was in about a week afterwards.
They were possibly the same. I got 62. premium. I did
not receive 1001. for rigging the market. I received fee that
transaction about 1261. for every 1,000 shares; 621. 10s. out,
and 621. 10s. in. My friends got a per tentage of 6s. to 10e.
per share. I have not done a great deal of business with
Mr. Wiley. I have no recollection of having acted with
Wiley on the Stock Exchange. We have not had a joint
interest in " stagging," that I recollect. I solemnly believe
it is not so. I did not buy 100 shares of Mr. Wiley in the
Great Munster ; it was not 80; it might be 60. I paid him
on the 2nd of May for 75. It is customary on the Stock Ex-
change to pay to one party for theses bought of another. I
think I got red of 1,000 thane in the Cork and Killarney, at
2a. 6d. per share. I gave some to my brother, and some to
Mr. Wiley. I bought them in ; I don't know that it was
within the week. illy impression is I bought 200 shame and
no mere. I can't say how many from Mr. Wiley. The
amount was included in the 3691. for the Munster.
Mr. Wiley never asked me to get them back.
I have not tried to get them beck. I have had
subsequent transactions with him. It is the ordi-
nary mune of jobbers to take completion; it began in
the railway badness—Re-examined I am a member of the
committee of the Stock Exchange, and was high sheriff of
Backs two years ago. I have known Wiley 20 years. I
got the subscribers I y getting letters of allotment signed.
When I bought them at 2e. 6d. it was as agent for Morley.
I gave the letters to different member, of the Stock Ex-
change, who were my personal friends. I don't recollect
whether I bought them from any other person. I paid for
a pest number of the Munster shares on the 2nd of May.
I received the others in the month of May. The borrowing
shares is a common practice,
In reply, it was contended that whatever objections might
exist to the practice of rigging the market, this case was
untouched, as it was now clear that no sale of the de-
fendant's shares had ever taken place ; that, if they had
been parted with, it was only by way of loan for • day or
two, in the manner and for the purpose described by Barnes;
that the plaintiff bed received no advantage whatever from
them, and, therefore, that there was an end of the charge of
fraud, and the claim of set off The jurors intimated an opi-
nion to the same effect, and a verdict was taken for the
plaintiff, on the issue as to the alleged fraud On the issue
as to the alleged set off Lord Denman's opinion was In
Moue of the plaintiff,for whom he directed a verdict. AIN
of exceptions was tendered to the ruling, subject thereto.—
Verdict for the plaintiff.
TILIMIN e. Dr DORI:Hi—A PRONOTIR or A RAILWAY
C MAT RIICOTIII AGAINST THZ COSIMITTIZ 0111 •
CONTFACT BOINIZMOINT TO Till FOHNIATIOX or THE 00U- I
PANT kND THE COMMITTII.—Thia was an action
the defendant as chairman of the Oxford, Theme,4=
Wyeombe, and ll:bridge Railway Company, since extinct,
for work and labour in surveying the line of that proposed
railway, and preparing the plans and maps necessary for
founding an application to parliament for powers to construct
it. The pleas denied the liability, and set up payment and
set off. A sum of 8001. had in fact bons paid, and
the cross-examination was directed towards the elide.
ing from the witnesses for the plaintiff that the
work was well paid by it. The objection to the
liability generally was that the plaintiff was in fact a
promoter of the scheme, Inasmuch as he bad become the
associate of the projectors before any committee was formed,
had caused their original scheme to be altered to suit his
views, had been active in getting members of the committee,
and was in the first instance self appointed. It was further
contended that the plaintiff, who, alter his appointment by
the committee generally, had at tint demanded Mt. per
mile, and had afterwards consented to take such remunera-
tion as the committee should deem sufficient, was bound to
be satisfied with the sum of 8001. awarded to him, which the
committee, after this action had been brought, had declared
to be enough. To this it wee answered that the agreement ini-
pceed on the committee the duty of remunerating bonil fide,
In other words, of paying what the plaintiff was fully en-
titled to.—Lord Denman gave the defendant leave to move
to enter a nonsuit on the second point if the verdict should
be for the plaintiff. On the other point he directed the jury
that the contract with the committee made after the general
appointment of the plaintiff as surveyor was evidence of a
new and epeeist contract to pay the plaintiff, and that if such
contract should be found the fact of the plaintiff having
been one of the promoters did not affect his right to recover
what was due to him—Verdict for the plaintiff-damages
2001.—The court sat till 8 o'clock.
Before &Comma Jury.
WILKINS V. WOOD.—EVIDIXCZ or A FAIMINO COS-
TOM WHEN Tel 171/1X HAS Bill TAKEN LIND= A
IMMIX INSTRUMENT SILENT AB TO THE CUSTOM.—Mr.
Berjetllt Shee and Mr. Vonles appeared for the plaintiff,
who claimed the sum of 162/ fee certain repairs and build
Mg work done by him on property of the defendant in
Surrey. The fact that the work bad been done, and its
value, having been proved, it was contended for the defend-
ant that he was entitled to set off a certain sum for re at of
the farms in Surrey belonging to him and occupied by the
plaintiff, and also the value of the dressing, manure, and
seed relinquished by him, according tothe custom of the
country, to the plaintiff, who entered on them in June,
1846 r under agreements is wilting. The custom of the
county of Surrey between Incoming and outgoing tenants
wee proved ; but, on its appearing that the agreements were
elect respecting the &wings, manuring's, and the other
grounds of the defendant's claim for which the custom was
vouched, it was objected that the plaintiff ought to show
that the custom applied when the re was a written agree-
ment silent as to it.—Mr. Watson, Q. C., and Mr. Keane,
fee the defendant, contended that the custom was the basis
Of the contract; that it was engrafted on every written
emstract that did not expressly exclude it or was not incon-
MAMA with it ; and that, the custom having been proved,
ft was for the plaintiff to show, either by the written agree.
Stott sr 'Miaow extrinsic to it, that the custom did not op-
dos INIMINCS of the parties. Lord Denman was of
the the defendant ought to show that the custom
alffiffieti olio them wee a written agreement, and directed
a weft fee the plaintiff.—Verct for the plaintiff.
Damps, 90i.
Teem e. DOMMIIII.—Act lON or •COOONT.—Mr.
sad Mr. Lash appeared for the plaiatiff,
=Mew Q.C.. ant Mr. Clembp, ter Vie Mfodeaß
EhtilLeihr474= he agemr=rt=
he kir 1101 Mr. Wow and
Ckukt. Wow_ irsi Ow Yu. 00l up porsoat et a
04•4•• k• • ••■•• NA awl MS en powwow of the
Wawa. ei Ks meetimet._The emiy petite al, Wood la
feteosos was OM hot VW Ms Ilea of oda' Ms Ike say