The Express.
London, England, 1847-07-20 00:00:00

CLERICAL.

The Archbishop of Canterbury has conferred the honorary
degree of M.A. upon tte Bev. F.. 'season, P. C. of St. James, Leeds,
and clerk in orders of the parish chureh, s.
PREPERMINTS —Rev. I. Berthon to Trinity P.C., Fare-
ham, Hants; pats. the Bishop et Winehoster and the Rev. 81r H.
Thempeon.—Rev. P. P. Burton to Leighland P.C., in Old Cleem,
401.: pat. the V. of Old Cleeve, and to Tram:nigh C., Somerset : dio.
Bath and Wells.—Rev. W. li. Calvert to Bt. Peter's C., Frome,
Somerset : dio. Bath and Wells.—Rey. B. Mast to Chards:mist. C., 130.
menet : din Bath end Wells.—Rev. F. Pbillott to Medford C., So.
menet : did. Bath and Wells.—Rev. B. 8. Redfern to St. Jamesaatiet.
C., Tauaton, Somerset: dlo. Bath and Wells—Flee. J. Woolley to
Crenate} R., Norf. : die. Norw., 661.: pat. the Bishop of Norwich.
VACANCllll.—Aoerington, Christchurch C., Lancaah.:
diA (.Teter; Rev. 8.. 8. Redkra, resierael.—e..ingham C., yneka,
archdio. York ; Rev. W. B. Calvert, reeignedL--Baltrord C., Boniemet
dio. Beth sad Walls; Rev. F. Phillott resigned.—St. Andrew, Mary
lebone, incumbency of : die. Loud.; meant by death of the Bev. T.
M. Patton.

Ego Entrilterntr.
• EQUITY COURTS.
Before tale Wiet,Chenechne at Enetted.
BEOCKLIBANI W. THE WHITEHATEN JUNCTION RAIL
RAT COMPANT—IN/ONCTION TO RESTRAIN A COMPANY
PROM TAKING POSIIIYMMON Or LAND.—Mr. Bethel! and
Mr. Wray moved for an injunction to restrain the White-
haven Junction Railway Company, their secretary, servants,
Re., from depositing in the hank the amount awarded by the
verdict of the jury to the nlaintilf, as the price for certain
land belonging to him, near Whitehaven, or from issuing
any precept to the sheriff of the county to deliver possession
of any part of the plaintiff's land to the said company, or
any person appointed by them to receive the same. The
bill for he formation of the railway from Whitehaven to
Maryport, was passed on the 4th of July, 1844, and by the
220th sect. of that Act, it was enacted, That the powers
of the company for the compulsory purchase cr taking of
lands for the purposes ef the railway, should not be
exercised after the expiration of 3 years from the paring of the
act. It appeared that the railway company had expressed
their intention of taking a certain portion of the plaintiff's
land, for which they bad offered him 1,6001 , but as he refused
the offer, the company gave th' plaintiff notice on the 19th
of June last, that they should proceed to try the question in
dispute by a jury. The jury assembled on the 3rd of July,
and owing to the case being lengthy, it was adjourned from
day today until the 6th of July, when they awarded to the
plaintiff the sum of 1,3791. as the price of compensation. The
question now raised was whether these proceedings were
invalid, on account of the jury not having given their verdict
till after the expiration of the three years allowed by the act
fir the company to exercise the compulsory clause.—Mr.
Stuart and Mr. Matins, for the defendants, contended that it
was not necessary for every step to be taken before the ex-
piration of the three years. The jury had actually met.
I together on the 3rd of July, and the proceedings would date
from that dayy, which was within the time specified.
Tke Vice Chancellor said the real question here was, what
construction should be put upon the 226th sect. of the act. It
was expressly declared that the compulsory powers should
not be exercised after the expiration of three years, and it
was argued that, because the process of awarding compenea.
tion by means of a jury had commenced on the 3rd of July,
one day before the expiration of the three years, that any
proceedings might go on afterwards for the purpose of
bringing the dispute to an end. Hie Honour thought that
construction was in direct contradiction to the words of the
statute ; it was quite a fanciful thing to say that, because
the jury was sitang for three days, that all their proceedings
were over on the first day. Even after the award, the money
would have to be paid into eoart, and the process issued for
taking possession on the land. Under these circumstances,
he thought the injunction must be granted aa a matter of
course.

yV
FLINT O. WARREN.—CONSTHUCTION of WILL.—CIIA-
RITABLE BEQUEST.—A question in this case was raised upon
a clause in the will of Mary Braddon, dated March 8, 1834,
by which the testatrix gave various legacies and annuities
therein specified, and she also gave unto and for the use and
benefit of the several in-brothers and in-sisters for the time
being actually and bona fide resident in the several hospitals
of or in the vicinity of the city of Canterbury, whose yearly
income to each such in-brother and ia-sister did not exceed
251., an augmentation or yearly increase of 51. to each and
every in-brother and in-sister for ever ; and the directed
her executors to pay to or invest in the names of the go-
vernors, masters, trustees, or acting patrons, of the said
several hospitals, a sum of lawful money equal to meet such
yearly augmentation ; and the rinn.re.i :eat in-brothers and
in sisters during such non residence should forfeit their,
his, and her proportion of such augmentation, and such for-
feitures and forfeiture should front time to time be raid over
to the then resident in-brothers and in-sisters in equal shares."
The question raised upon this clause was, whether the be-
quest was void for uncertaiety, or, if not, whit charities
were intended to be benefited by the testatrix----Mr. Twig,
Mr. Bethell, Mr. J. Parker, Mr. Cooper, Mr. Chandlcss, sad
Mr. Lewis, appeared as counsel for the different parties.
The Vice-Chancellor said it appeared to him there was
very great difilculty in attaching any meaning to this clause
lin the will. It was impossible, he thought, for any person
to make sense of it, or to ascertain, from the words the testa-
trix had used, what charities were to be benefited. If she
had pointed out the hospitals in Canterbury, there might
have been some meaning, but no one could ascertain what
charities in the vicinity of the city were intended. It was
impossible, also, to decide what particular persons were to
be benefited. He considered, upon the whole, it was rea-
sonably plain that no one could fix a meaning to the clause,
so as to state what was the sum which caght to be appro-
priated, or to whom it was to be paid. He should, there-
fore, hold that the bequest was void for uncertainty.

Before Vioe-Choneellor height Brut*.
MOUCOM v. CORPORATION OF POOLE.—SURETY.—The
corporation of Poole hod granted a lease of the tolls to be
taken at the market, and the plaintiff was a surety to the
corporation for payment of the rent. The lessee became bank-
rupt, whereupon the corporation brought an action against
the surety for the arrears of rent, and the latter obtained
the common injunction to restrain the proceedings at law,
on the ground that, when the contract of suretyship was
entered into, the corporation omitted to communicate to the
surety the existence of certain incumbrances which pre-
vented .the lessee from enforcing payment of the tolls ;
stating also in his bill that the corporation refused to assist
the lessee, as they ought to do under the covenants in the
lease, in instituting proceedings to recover the tolls.—Mr.
Russell and Mr. Preeling showed cause easiest dissolving
the injunction ; and his Honour, before calling on Mr. Teed
and Mr. Dickinson, who appeared for the corporation, sug-
gested that the action bad better proceed to judgment at law
before the motion was disposed of. The further hearing of
the application, therefore, stood over till after the trial.