The Express.
London, England, 1851-12-17 00:00:00

iLaW fllteiitynce.

EQUITY COURTS.—YESTERDAT.
PyroVß ens Norm or roalites.ui.
IN at: THE MoNMOVfIISUIRE AND GLAMORGANSHI RE
DANIIINO COMPANY.
The petitions for placing this bank under the operation
of the \Vinding•up Act stood fur judgment this morning.
The Master of the Rolls said he bad read through the
affidavits very carefully. some of which were delivered to
him only on Saturday last ; and it was very desirable, un-
derubtelly, to come to an early decision on the subject, but
they did not materially alter the view that first presented
itself to him. They showed increasing difficulty as tot the
mode of winding up the company without the interposiion
and aid of the court. But, taking into consideration the
'steno is of the season, that if an order for winding up was
made now, nothing could Ire done tf, etuallv for some time,
he should direct all the petitions to stand riser till the 13th
of January. For that reason he would forbear to go into
the various eircumstancei of the case now, only stating
that the tendency of these proceedings would not induce
him to encisid,r any excuse f the gentlemen who
were enieavouring to wind up the affairs of the company
without the wisistance and instrumentality of the court, if
they said that by reason of them they were prevented from
obtaininx the funds nee:vary for that purpose.
Dewitt' r. Tut M %you AND Eoltrousitos or
LIVERPOOL.

The hearing of this ease was resumed.
Mr. Walpole addressed the court on behalf of the plain-
tiff, who, he said, applied to the court for relief, not in a
piddle character, hut as a private individual whose private
pro's sty had been injured by th
en c
e orporation taking
Lis water for purposes not autrised by the act
of parliament. Illy the first act they could
only draw water for the purpose of extinguishing tires
and watering the street.; and if they drew water from the
Mersey they might put it to the purpo-e of baths and wash-
honer.. The only reasonable eonstruction to be put upon
the acts of parliaini Ilt was, that the first act gave power to
the commissioners to supply water for three purposes, two
absolute and one unconditional; that the two first act. gave
power to supply water to other places, and the third act
kept the powers given by that act separate from those of
the first art, and unless the acts gave the whole power of the
water ion, the hand, of the corporation to supply it for the
sanitary purposes of the town, then the supply was to be
kept areorilituCto the provisions ofithe first act, which were
confined to the extinguishing of fires and the watering of
the sir-,ts. Then assuming that the corporation was to be
consitleretl in the light of individual proprietors, he con-
tended they could hot use their right with reference to water
under their property for say other purpose than that con-
'meted with their prop. rty, that was, with the land itself,
from which they derived it.
Mr. Iteundell Palmer replied, contending that tinder the
provisions of the three acts the corporation w. re justified in
wing the water for every public purpose, such us flushing
the si w, Ts and extintrinshing fires. Even outer the Sani-
tary Act the corporation were called upon to enter private
dwellings to .e th..t there was nothing existinc injurious
to poldo: health; then to use the water for the pur-
pose of cleansing; and by other provisions they were also
called upon to supply water to every house for domestic
paves s. And if by supplying this water the water in the
pliuntills well had subside] they could not be railed unon
to make reparation, the wrong being dime in the it public
char.kel. r.
'll6.- Mater of the Rolle mid ha would give his judgment
to-saurrepsi %this day).

&NMI Vu sues sus IL K1111.1M1111%
IS NE INS WaiI,VERSA.4I.I4IS, CIIEXT/.lt, ANS BIRK EN•
Nam, JESCTII,I74 lIIILW.tY C..vrAsT.
Twat) fear dilrestst stations were mole by persons
who bad bees placed on the list of contributories to the
shoe, company. Most of these motions were on the same
grounds us that of " EL re llotruye reported
h" repoed in the
ispnrss ye•devday, orders were made.
Saw of tM• einstrsbuttsisa only applod fur leave to move
bl r t the master's repeal wile, and order, were made as
el mane.

BM= Ilta Janis "'Anoint.
THE (inEtT N.uiriliclitti 11%11 m iir3II•ANT tt. THE
1111A•crit,rtic, Snail men, •Nlo LiNcuLNulilltE
Hate-
WaY Coolie ear.
Ily nicrivincnt mitred into on the 11th of April, 1818,
beta.. n the Cit. at North. rn and E.s.t I.intein•hire Rail-
way Companie., by two of their director, of the one purr, and
th. Manchester, sin-Meld, and Linculn•hiee Railway Isniu-
pany, by two oh their directors, of the nth, r part, certain
teem, were arranged between the two ennipanics fur the
One of the railway 'whinging to the other cowpony, upon
Certain 4 rats Let we, n them, the main term of the agree-
ment Is ing as " That the Nlanchester, Sheffield,
and I..i.eoln•lsir. Railway Company shall have the tight of
ru • with their csigirws, carnage, anal trucks, and ma-
im, .na traffic, on Ilue Eat Lincolnehire line between Great
treolisby owl Louth ; and the East Lincolnshire C pan)
shall h toe the .one right once tile Maiwitt Mr?. Sheffield,
and lancoln,liire line between Great 1.; ritually and
New ILdlsnd, provided ouch traffic require to
•u VW. both lines, and that the terms shall
be the payment of siaty.aia per cent. of the
gr., • eceipt• by the eninpany conveying the traffic to the
coloosity ow ll ll .4 the line, and each ariupaily .hall m orn',
SLII Arr.. lotion for the other at N. w Holland and
Louth nap. eta e. ly." Puler thi. agreement the plaintiff,
w•.. 1 the el. Pendant.' railway for some time, bat in coot
qwv. of deeicreemen4 pprimtileg up between them, the
pl duldf. like' a lull on the 13th of May, IsIS, seeking the
ape, is•rionnance of the Anne agreement, wlitit the par-
In • ,161,,, .1 into mutual fikerutenaristP, but without prej.
diet. to Any givedion, and nothing further w. done in that
suit. The did; rune.. hetween the companies having subs.
qn. ally o.l.lintitsl, notice was given by the ilefeialants to
the plaint.ffs on tin :Nth of June' Paid. determining the
ntre“Accut of the 13th of April, 1545. This
nulii••• 5.411 followed by a curreaponolenee between
the of of the two companies, which ended in
th. priturnt wit, which we. commenced on the 25th
of November last. The plaintiff, now moved upon notice
for ai. injunction to restrain the &lend:Ants from olutructing
the plaintiffs, the fireat Northern thrilway Company, from
running with their engines and eaeritire• over au much of the
line of railway of the Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincoln-
shire Railway 17nmpanr, a, wan conetrueted between tireat
and New Holland Pier, and front making alter-
ation• in the booking of passengers, or in the working of
traffic over the railway contrary to the agreement of April,

18114.
Mr. Wigram, Mr. Malin., and Mr. Denison, in support
of the isiotm, submitted that under the terms of the agree-
ment of 1%13, the elan.: giving to each railway company
power over the line of the other company was a con-
tract handing between the companies fur ever, except by
mutual consent.
Mr. Neon and Mr. thisoni, fur the defendants, contended
th it the true eonstrus thin of the agreement Was, that it was
• license revocable on either side, or otherwise an agreement
reed; aide at any time by either party. The right was nut
reed between the companies to their respective sur-
er...or% it would have been if the perpetuity of the right
haul hien intended. They also telerred to other parts of
the .igreerneut in which as to other rights conceded the
period of the enjoyment wits specified to last for three
years.
The Vier-Chancellor said the question upon this motion
entirely depended upon the construction of the agreement.
It had been contended—fir 4, that it WWI only a license;
si and coodly, that the contract was (or ever, and not to be
varied, except by mutual consent. Ile thought the latter
the true cunstruchon. It was not immaterial that the
right of user was to a Nirapany. A grant of Lind to such •
body would give them the fee without naming the succes-
sors, and in this particular case, the grant being to a com-
pany, was different front what it would have been to on
individual. Many of the tenns used noel), permanence,
and he thought the argument arising from a clause
fixing the enjoyment fee three years wa, ambiguous.
This question was not one of specific performance, but
whither it was as agreement which could be enforced. Ile
thought it could. There was no waiver. '(he only diffi-
culty was the mode of enjoyment. but the grant was not
void for uncertainty, and he thought there was no such
vagueness in it All that the court could not enforce it.
Ili* [Latour granted the injunction.
Tin. NEWRY AND ENNISKILIXN RAILWAY COMPANY r.

1.71.5TE14 It tILWAY CoMPANY.
Mr. Daniel and Mr. Speed opened a motion for an injunc-
tion to restrain tho defendants from proceeding with au
action .it law, hued for trial an Friday neat, to recover the
amount awarded to be paid by the plaintiffs to the de-
fendints by the commissioners of railways, and to which
this. had no defence at Liw, but submitted that they had •
good defence in equity.
he caps will be resumed to-morrow.

COURT OF Qli F.EN'S BENCH.—Yesrenoas.
SITTIMIA AT Nast PILIVA AT IiVIDITALT:BINCOII LOAD CAMYSILL
AIM A PIPIECIAL JUST.
ritFNTICIS r. Amos (OFFICIAL MANAGER).
This was an issue directed by the Court of Chancery, and
caw Ix fore this court in the form of an action to recover
the sum of Idti Ss. 4d., being the principal and interest
due upon a bond given by the plaintiff and his co-trustee,
Mr. Colton, to a Mr. Hudson. The plaintiff and Mr. Cox-
ton, formerly an attorney at Oundle, but now • barrister,
wee,, co-trustees to • joint stock brewery company at
Ounile, in Northamptonshire, established in 1637, and
the company having become considerably involved, various
sums of money were from time to time borrowed, and
amongst others the amount in question, which had been
applied to the purposes of the company. Mr. Colton had
been called upon to pay the full amount upon the bond;
and the company, not having succeeded, eventually found
its way into the Mister's office to be wound up. The
brewery has been offered for sale without success, and is
now being carried on by the official manager. The only'
question for the jug.. whether the directors and trustees
had the power to e the liability of the shareholders
generally under their deed of constitution.
The ease occupied the whole day, and tenneated in •
verdict for the plaintiff for the amount claimed, to which
Mr. Jaren tendered • bill of exceptions against the ruling
of the lemma judge, on the ground that there was no evi-
dence to go to the jury in support of the plaintiff's ere.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.—TESTEIDAT.
Ilsrrugua At Sr Pam m Lamm.—B•ron Ono Jam=
Jams Am, • Smut Jrar.
Simillomo• v. BOTRIL AXOTML—ACTION POl VIZ
Hirt or FIALIUTORS Pot horcs'e tintroeirs.
The &Asti/ is *tie ere err t eireemith it liestliesip-
tes-rew, Ruseelt-immee, and he mil theeelbsiole Warm
Sayer est eraser ter the below* et es eseeme ter the
base et pude for the esteblithassit at theleieses The
esig pies vies tbe resort wee ate Emir the of
the

According to the statement of the counsel for the plaintiff
I' ogre. ment was entered into in May last, between the
plaintiff and M. Sover, and n gent], man named rheny, who
was then connected with him in th, nrinagement of Gore
House. By this agreement the plaintiff undertook to sup-
ply chairs, tables. glass, crockery, plate, linen, &c., upon
Lire. The quantity which it was thought would be te-
gaited was suMeient to dine 1,600 persons, who were di-
vided into four classes, viz , those whose dinners and tun.
cheons cost, exclusive of wine, 2.. 61, 55., 7s. 61., and
10s. 6d. each. The goods lent were to be paid for at so much
per hundred per rek • the sums named per hundred being
Nls., 30,.. 50.., an I GO:. In addition to this there was to
he a payment of 51. per cent. upon these amounts,
for breakage and loss, and the plaintiff was to bear the ex-
pense of washing and cleaning the goods. Itwas also men-
tioned that if the goods were paid fur at a fixed sum the
price would be 1201. a week. Things went on upon the
I,:isis of this agreement until the 3rd of July, when the
plaintiff gave a week'. notice that he should remove his
goods, it being part of the agreement that either party
might put an end to it by a week's notice. About the 9th
of July Mr. Symons, the defendant, had an interview with
the plaintiff, and the consequence was that the notice was
not put in force Shortly after this, Mr. Symons became
connected with M. Sover in the management of Gore
House. On the of July the plaintiff en-
tered into an agreement with Messrs. Sayer and
Symons to lend them the goods at a tiled sum of 1001. a
week, and it was upon this agreement that the present ac-
tion was founded. The goods continued at Gore House un-
til the beginning of October, and the balance now claimed
was 6801., credit being given for 390/. paid upon account.
The agreement sued upon was a verbal one, mid the
plaintiff and several other witnesses wen called, but the
evidence of the agreement was very slight. Some other
witnesses were also called in order to show that the charge
made was fair and reasonable.
Mr. Serjeant Wilkins, at the conclusion of the plaintiff's
case, rose and was about to address the jury on behalf of
the defendants,
The jury, however, stopped him by stating that they
were of opinion that the sari ement had sot been proved.
A verdict sego, therefore, entered for the defendants,

NON•ATTINDADICII OF iI:RYMEN.
Upon the ease of Casey V. Salmon being called on, a diffi-
culty arose in consequence of the absence of common jury-
men, for although the associate called every name in the
panel, only 9 jurors answer, d.
The Chief Justice then or.lered the two summoning offi-
cers to come furwarl Pi prove the service of the summonses
upon the jurymen, in order that they might be fined.
The summoning officers, however, were not in attend-
rmee, and his lordship, therefore, had nu power to tine the
ab.ent jurymen.
The Chief Jiigice then imposed a fine nn each of the
summoning officer., and Ow juryracri escaped.

••
COURT OF 13ANKRUPTCY.-TESTERDAY.
ByPOlf Ma. Commainsres Eva..

IN RE BECILLAND.—FATENAIVE FAILERZ OF AN
INSI:IO6NCE AOF.NT.
This wu the last examination meeting in the case of
Joseph Iluttye Louis Buckl.inil, described as an insurance
agent, of Threadneedle-street. Ilia balunce-shcet extended
over a period of nearly eight years—front the Ist of January,
1,411, to the lit of November lust, and contained the fol-
lowing items To creditors, 30,892/. ; ditto holding EC-
curity, 2.0001. ; ,1,916/. ; profits, 9,h101. By
good debts PO/. ; had unit doubtful ditto, estimated to
produce 901. ; property, :o:0/.: house and personal ex-
penses, and premium, on lite insurances, 7,3;21. ; trade
expenses, 3,01111. ; inured and law charges, 1:47. ; losses
on bad debt., furniture, and tot shares, 27,7071. ; property

held u security, 2,00%
Mr. Cox, tor the liasignces, Oft red no opposition, Dud the
bankrupt patrall.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.
-
YORK.—Mommy, Dn. 13.
Mr. Justice Motile took his seat on the bench shortly after
twelve o'clock. The grand jury hasiog been sworn in, Mr.
Justice 'Manly addressed them very briefly, and shortly
afterwards the court proceeded with the trial of Jliut cases,
&c.
The only ca.se po.l,l,sed of any interest tried before Mr.
Baron Platt in the other court was one in which a man
' named Sowed Cooper was charged with having committed
perjury in the course of proceedings arising out of an intim
melon under the Wonted Aet, which lie laid against a
person of the uame of Crabtrie. Ile was found
and sentsueed to seven years' tnussportation.