The Express.
London, England, 1847-08-03 00:00:00

SPORTING.

TATTERB.II,I:B.-31 ono tr.
The Uoodwood settling. although far leas heavy than last
year, did not poet off ao comfortably ; three or four parties were mall
rat for various amounts, and aztonirst those who were present there
was a general complaint of the " tight/ins. of money we hope that
another week will enable us to speak tame favourably. Paying and
receiving occupied the attention of all present until between dr and
seven o'clock, and It watt only in the last half-hour that we were en-
abled to make out the following short list of 'nicer :
EPOS HANDICAP (Yoke).--4 to 1 eget Mathematician
(I), 7 to I opt Limerione, 0 to I agst Sir Martin, 10 to 1 opt (irlin-
don.
ST. LEOPIA—Even on Cossack (the field for choice), 450
to 100 apt Lord Eatinton's two It), 7to I apt Eryr (t), 11 to 1 apt
Can Tromp (t), 13 to I apt Planet (t), 13 to 1 apt Mr. Martin (I), 20
to 1 apt Foreclosure, 1000 to 13 apt Red Hart (t), 1000 to IS agst
Liberator (t) : 600 to 300 wan laid once apt Comet.

Brighton recce commence to-morrow, and will lest three
dare the amber of horses arrived ic represented to be harper than
niad end there k a
or
of ease good skirt. Eithin of the
momisir trains at 9, tai, or II o'clock wall be in 'Ante for the Irk not.

aW Entelitentet.
EQUITY COURTS.
Before the Master of the Rolla.
IN RE MERCHANT TAILORS' COMPANY.--COSTS OP RE-
INVESTMENT OP PURCHASE MONET UNDER LONDON
BRIDGE APPROACHES ACT.—The corporation of London
having, under the act of 2 & 3 Viet., e. 17, taken seine
land from the Merchant Tailors' Company for the purpose of
improving the approgehes to London Bridge, the purchase
money was paid into court in consequence of some doubts
exis:ing about the title. And subsequently the Merchant
Tailors' Company made three several applications under the
act for re-investment of the money in purchasing other lands.
A small balance of 631. was left in the Bank, and they now
applied to have this balance re-invested and the costs attend-
ing the re-investment paid by the corporation as provided
by the act.—Mr. Randell, for the corporation, objected
to pay the costs of a fourth application, which he
contended was unreasonable.—The Master of the Rolls
thought that, unless the conduct of the party whose land
was taken under an act of this description was vexatious in
the mode of re-investment, and inch conduct was specially
brought before the court, there was no reason why he should
not have the costs of so many applications for re-investments
of the purchase money as circumstsnces might make conve-
nient, and he ordered the corporation to pay the costs of the
re-investment, according to the terms of the act.

Before the Vlce-Chanottlor of England.
IN RE TUE BRISTOL AND EXETER RAILWAY COMTANT,
ax BURR LA.NOTON.—CONTS OF PAYING PuIieRASE
MONEY OUT OF COURT.—It appeared in this case that the
Bristol and Exeter Railway Company had purchased certain
property which had belonged to Mr. Gore Langton for life
and the purchase money, amounting to 2,9891., was paid
into court. Mr. Gore Langton having since died, his grand-
son, the present petitioner, Mr. Henry William Gore Lang-
ton, became tenant in tail, and executed • disentailing deed
of the fund in court. This petition prayed that the money
might he pail out to the petitioner, and that the court would
order the costa of the disentailing deed, and also the costs
for payment out of court, to be paid to the petitioner.
—Mr. kinglake, in support of the petition, contended that
the court had power to order the clots to be paid
by the company. The words were:—" All coats, charges,
and expenses, which might be incurred in consequence of
the purchase of land, and also of the investment of the pur-
chase-money in government securities, or of the investment
of such purchase-money in land, together with the neces-
eary costa and charges of obtaining the proper orders
for such purchase."--Mr. Saunders also appeared in support
of the petition.—Mr. Osborn, for the railway company, con-
tended that, although the court might order payment of the
costs and expenses attending the investment of the money in
load, it had no power to make such an ordir in a case like
this, where the person absolutely entitled applied for pay-
ment out of court to himself—The Vice-Chancellor said it
appeared to him the words of the act did not authorise him
to order the coats in this particular case.

Before Vke-Chluicellor Knight Bruce.
Ex PARTE FRANCRLTN, RE GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAT
ACT.—TEMPORARY INVESTMENT ON MORTGAGE OF PUR-
CHASE-MONEY OP LANDS TAKEN LY RAILWAY COMPANY.
—This was the petition of a tenant for life and the trustee
of the inheritance of lands, which had been taken by the
Great Northern Railway Company, to have 4,600/. part of
the purchase-money invested upon a mortgage, instead of
being laid out as usual in the funds, until a permanent re-
investment in land could he effected. Mr. De Gex' in sop-'
port of the petition, referred to the 70th section of the Lands
Clauses' Consolidation Act, authorising temporary invest-
ments on real security. Mr. Jolliffe, for the company, sub-
mitted that such a proceeding would occasion much more
expense thsn the ordinary investment in the funds, and that
the company ought not to be charged with the extra costs.
The Vice-Chancellor said that, as the act authorised tempo-
rary investmerve upon real security, the tenant for life
seemed entitled to the increased rate of interest which the
money would produce if so laid out; and the company must
bear the expenses within a proper limit. There was a diffi-
culty as to the party to whom the mortgage should he made,
the act containing no directions on the subject, and there
being here only one trustee. There must be a reference to
the master as to the t tle, and the master must settle who
should be the mortgagee.

Before tike-Cmeneellor Wtgrant.
Ex PARTE THE BIRMINGHAM AND NORTH STAFFORD-
ettIRE RAILWAY COMPANY.—RAILWAY DEPOKITS ACT,
9 Vtcr., c. this ease a pctitioa had been presented
for the payment out of court of the deposit of 6,0001., the
company's act having passed. The session having termi-
nated, and the p aliment being dissolved, the petitioners
were unable to procure the certifiate of the Speaker of the
House of Commons, or of the chairman of committees in the
House of Lords, as required by the above-mentioned act.—
Mr. Burett for the petitioners stated, that inquiries bad
been made of the registrars of the court, and no instance
could be found of a decision upon a petition presented under
similar circumstances.—His Honour observed, that the pe-
culiarity of this case was, that, if a strict construction of the
clause of the act making these requirements were Dteesury,
as it seemed to him to be, the difficulty was one which the
petitioners would be unable to cure, now that the parlia-
ment was dissolved. He would, however, give his opinion
upon the point before the court finally ruse.