The Express.
London, England, 1848-06-15 00:00:00

tats Entrlltgcnct.

NOTICES.
Sruirra Crania.—Mintaso (lama —Yesterday the Right lion.
Lord Denman and Mon. Mr. Justice l'atteron Nmdiy appointril the
following bye tor opening the outandesion and holdin2 the ansit.•
Itutlandshire : Saturday, July 15, at lialthilm.•-Nurthilmutinuilitir :
Satiltday, July 15, at Northampton.-12ncolushirt: Wednerylay,
Jul. 19, at the Castle at Lineoln.—tlty of Lincoln: Weilneaday, July
19, at the Guildhall of the City utLineoln.—Nottiughlaidure : Satur-
day. July 22, at Nottingham.—Torn uf Nottingham : Saturday. July
22, at the Guildl.ll.—Derbyshires Wednetday, July 211, at lurby.-:-
Leicestenthiry: Saturday, July :9, at Lriceitt. r.—Borough of I mei,
ter: Saturday, July 29, at the Cut ilhalL—Warulekah:te (Can ntry
INrinion;: Weslnenluy, An g. 2. at Coventry.- Warldelohire (War-
wick lrivisiott): Thursday. Aux. 2, at the Castle at Watuick.

EQUITY COURTS.
Beim the toed Chancellor.
CL7NNINGIIAII O. WILL. REIIIDVART
FATATE —This was en appeal from a decision of Vice.
Chancellor Knight Bruce, upon the construction of the will
of John Killpetrick, whereby he gate his real and personal
estate to trustee., to convert the realty into personalty, and
pay 3001. a year toe Mr... Cunningham, end 3001. a year to a
Mrs. Stuart, for their lives, and after giving three annuities
of 251. each to three persons, two of whom were daughters
of Mrs. Stuart, and one the d rughter of Mrs. Cunningham,
he gave the residue of his estate to these two persons, from
and alter the death of the but of the arnuiteote. Mr..
Cunningham died in 1843, and Mrs Stuart in 184 G, and
two out of the three annuitauts of 251. are dead, and the
question was whether these annuities from 1843 and
1844 respectively fell into the residue given by the
will, or was undisposed of. The Vice. Chancellor held
that there was en tatestscy as to such of the annuities
as fell iu before the death ot the last annuitant.—Mr. J.
l'arker and Mr. Sbapter contended that the will disposed
of the whole of the testator's property, and the general gilt
residue comprised all the annuities as they fell in. They
refereed to " Leeke r. Robinson" (2 Merivale, pp. 3*
365, 354), " Cambridge r. ROM " (8 Ye sey, rp. 12 and
23), ' Askers r. Phipps (3 Clerk and F.), and " Lienery
r. Fitzetrald " Jacsh's rep.)—Sr F. Simpkinsen and Mr.
Pigott supported the V..ce Chancellor's judgment, and cited
other cases—The Lord Chaneeller, withont hearing Mr.
Parker in reply, said it appeared to him that there was a
clear and distinct gilt of the whole of the personal estate, and
that whatever remained after the annuities were satisfied,
fell into the residue ; some of the cuts last referred to could
not be applied here. when there was a gift of all the re at and
residue of the terator's estate. His lordship reversed the
Viet-Chaneellor's decree.

Before the Viee-Chancelkr of England.
COLE v. Scorr.—Cosierteue-rto• or A WILL—Pao.
PBRTY ACWARLD AFTER THE DATE OF A \VILI..—A
question was raised in this case under the sill of a testator,
usme:l Cole, dated in April, 1543, by which, after making a
provision for his widow, the testator gave the residue of his
property to his nephews, in these terms, " MI and singular
the residue and remainder of my mesauagcs, firms, lands,
tenements, hereditainents, and premises, whatsoever and
wheresoever' and of what tenure and nature soever, and
generally all the freehold, copyhold, and leasehold estates
whereof I am now seized or peasessed in any manner what-
wen r." In a subsequent clause of the will the testator also
gave to his nephews other property in these teems "MI
such manors, messuages, farms, lands, tenements, heredita-
ment', tic., feeehald, copyhold, and leasehold, as are now
vested iu me, or, as to the said leaseholds, shall he vested in
me at the tine a my death." The question raised was
whether certain property, acquired by the testator after the
date of his will, would pass to the nephews. The 21th see.
tion of the Will Act, I Vie., c. 26, was referred to, by which
it is declared that all wills shall speak from the date
thereof except a contrary intention shall expressly appear,
and it was contei.dt d that the words of the will st now vested
in me " were intended to apply to the death of the testator,
and that all property acquired by him after the date of his
will would consequently pass to the devisees.—The Vice-
Chancellor ssid the real question in this case was whether
the contrary into ntion spoken of by the net appeared epon
this will, because, if it did not, the general words were such
as would pass the suhnequeetly acquired property; the
words were whereof lam now seized or possessed ;" the
question was whether those words did not by themselves
mark the dist:nction, and whether it was not plain by the
construction the testator had himself put upon the words
" I am now seized." ho did not mean the estates and tene-
ments w bleb he had on the very day he was making his will.
His Honour thought that in the nub-equent c awes of the
will it was clear that the testator had made a difference be-
tween the expressions now and a future time. His opinion
was that the testator had himself put a construction upon
the words he had used, and that he intended to pass those
estate* only that he was seized or possessed of on the very
day upon which he male his will.

Before Vice-Chareellor Wlgram.
WALKER V. BASTES:4 COUNTIES RAILWAY COMPANY.
--SP kCIFIC IEMPOILMANCE.-111SepteMber, 18.16, the plain-
tiff was served by the defendants w th the usual notice under
the powers of their act, that certain houses in Wheeler-street
and rheenix-street, Spite Melds, of which he was the owner,
would be required for the purposes of the railway, and he
was requested in the notice to furnish the particulars of his
claim. Ise October, 1816, the plantiff sent in his claim to
the defendants. This, however, had nut been assented to by
the defendants, who bad moreover neglected to take any of
the steps, prescribed by the act icr obtaining an asses went
of the prio•. 1 bey had lately, however, entered into pos-
session of one of thn howl's, which they were about to re-.
move. The 1411 was filed, stating that xervice of the notice upon
the plaintiff was tantamount to a contract to purchase
the pet mite's, and praying that they might bo decreed speci
finally to perform the emarset, either by paying the plaintiff
the amount of his claim, or by procuring a jury to be sum.
moned for the purpose of assessing the price. At the hear-
ing of the cause, on the 6th inst., the Solicitor-Gene rsl and
Mr. Law appeared for the plaintiffs —Mr. Vinod and Mr.
Grove, fee the defendants, contended that, admitting a con-
tract to have been established by sending the notice, the cane
resembled those in which the court had refused to enforce a
contract to sell at a price to be fixed by arbitration until such
price hod been actually fixed. They contended, also, that
by leaning out a writ of mandamus to contpel the defendants
to take the necessary steps for fixing the ccmpensation
under the statute the plaintiff could obtain complete
relief at law, and that the case, therefore, was
one in which this court would not give its aid by decreeing
specific performauce.—His Honour now gave judgment, ob.
.1 flier( that the case was not analogous to those which had '
been cited for the defendants. In those cartes the court had
no means of ascertaining the price to be paid. Here it was
not so, fir the contract being once established, the parties
were enabled to determine the price by the terms of their
act. It had been said also that there had been no instance
in which the court bad entertained a suit to do that which
might be done through a writ of mandamus; and he certainly
could not call such a precedent to mind. However, without
relying upon the circumstance that the case was a proper
one for an injunction, he could not doubt that
the court, the contract being established, would
entertain a vendor's bill for specific perfirmance ; and the
circumstance that a mode of proceeding bad been prescribed
by the legislature was not sufficient to oust the jurisdiction.
of the court, in a case otherwise properly cognisable by it.
If, however, extraordinary costs had been incurred by taking
the tedious and prolix course of a suit in Chancery, instead
of proceeding by mandamus, or if the necessity of litigation
had been occasioned by the pkintiff's refusal to give rotor•
minion which might save the expense of proceeding by
means of a jury, that might be considered on the question of
costs. The proper course, under the circumstances, would

hr, to order that the defrodants do, within twenty one de, s
rom the date of the order. issue a vest-rant to the sheriff to
mammon a Jury to aseertail the ,mount of compensAtion to
he paid by them to the plaintiff. Further directions and
taste reserved.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
flitting* In Banco.
REGINA V. GILIAItD.-DEFRAUDING TRZ RIVEN VP.--
In this ease the Attorney.thiseral, on the 2nd inst., obtained
a rule to show cause why the conviction should not he
quashed. The defendant had been convicted under the
40th section of 7 & 8 Geo. IV, cap 52, which authorised
any maltater to convict any of his servants who maliel..usly
..nd with intent to injure his master should commit any
breach of the revenue laws, and to show that conviction ss an
answer to any proceedings easiest himself. Circumat,..e,.s
had occurred which created& suspicion that a maltster of the
name of Hague, at Wakefield, was guilty of a breach o
the excise laws, in conseqnet.ce of which a watch was
set upon his premises, and the defendant wee dis-
covered in the act of moving barley from one stage
to another of the malting process, before the legal hours.
Proceedings having been threatened against the master, he
stifled that what Giliard had done was with,ut hie such°.
tity. His attention was then directed by the excise to a
section of the act which provided that a servant guilty of
such conduct was liable to be imprivoned with hard labour
for a pet iod not exceeding twe lye nor less than three months.
Hague then preferred the charge against Gabled before two
magistrate*, and upon his pleading guilty he was sentenced
to three months' imprisonment, without herd labour.
It was alleged that the proceedings were illegal, in-
asmuch as the excise had not received notice of
the chew, and the magistrates were not empowered
to dispense with hard labour. -Moreover, it we,
contended that the master and servant had been in collusion
to defraud the revenue, and the object in getting the convict
teen quashed was, that ulterior proceedings might be token.
--Mr. Pashley now showed cause against the rule, and
ergurd that the court had no jurisdiction; and the mac
having torn punished fur an offence which he admitted, the
decision of the magistrates ought not to be disturbed —The
Attorney General having been heard in support of the rule,
the court, in strong terms, condemned the conduct of Hogue,
and, stating that a fraud had undoubtedly been commit., el on
the magistrates, declared that the rule mted 63 made
absolute.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
sitting. In Mateo. —(New Trial Paper.)
lktowim• e. Tuumeaorr.-- Mr. Baron Alderson delivered
judgment in this ease, which had ricently been srgutd, and
tin.e taken to consider. The action was for 1,5001., money
had and received, and was brought against the defendant as
a member of the committee of management of the Dover and
Deal Railway, the plaintiff haymow, as he alleged, paid that
sum as a depatit nn shares, on the contlith•n that, if the bill
should not hi obtained, all the posit should be returned.
1. appeared that the ch fendarit had to come a member of the
committee on the 2nd of February, and that on the 3rd or
4th of the same month, the plaintiff had, at the request of
Mr. Hook, the secretary of the company, con., fated to take
the shares and pay the m,ney in question on the faith of the
contract above mentioned. kl r. -Hook could not say when
he had obtained the authority of the committee to enter into
such cmtract., but he swore that he had such authority, and
that the defendant himself had joined the company under it.
It also appeared that by the terms of the deed executed by
the defendant, power was given to a committee of three to
bind all the other members of the committee. Under these
circumstances bir F. Pollock directed a verdict fur the de-
fendant, biing of opinion that there was no evidence to go to
the jury 50 MAIM CI him with the emir ct end the authority
to enter into it. This rule was obtained to enter a verdict
for tho plaintiff. and. argued recently. The opinion of the
court wan that the rule ought to he discharged. The evi-
dence left it uncertain whether the defendant was a nu other
of the board when the authority was given to Mr. Houk, and
it was a rule of law that where a party failed to prove the
affirmative the negative ought to prevail. The direction of
the Chief Baron wvs then fore quite correct, hut as the pLin.
la might obtain better evidence he ought to be at liberty to
he nonsuited, so that he might bring a fresh action.—Rule
discharged accordingly.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
Non Pan" (at weatonnaltz:. -11rfor Mr. Jaatica Williams and a

6asmou Jury.

NATI.I•O 0. CORN! —Thin was an Winn to recover 1001.
old, the value of certain rirh manqueraile demises, hired of
the plah.tiff, by the defendant, Capt.Carnee to enable pim-
a Runde lady to attend the grand bal masque of M. Jullien
on the 23tb February last, and a similar entertainment at
Vauxhall on the 23rd of August last. The defendant pleaded
tnat he was not halite, on the ground that the dresses were
" hired fur immoral purposes—namely, for the purposes of
prowitution;" and that, except as to 201., he w.., never
indebted. Mr. Si rjeaut Wilkins and Mr. Loch were
counsel for the plaintiff, and Mr. Cottle for the defendant.
—The plaintiff, Mr. Inane John Nathan, keep* n reanque.
rade dress wareheuse at 18, Cantle-street, Leierster square,
end Mr. Charles J.Carne, the defendant, who wee foimerly a
lieutenant in the 71st Regiment, resides in Lisloastreet,
Leicester square, and commonly goes by the name of Cap-
tain Came, though not is reality a captain. Ile is • young
men, keying but recently attained his majority.—John
Cramp, the foreman of the plaintiff, deposed that in the
autumh of lint year Captain Carne, the defendant, came to
the plaintiff's shop and hired polka dress. s fur himself and
a lady for use night. The charge f.r the hire of the gentle-
man's dress was 21. 121. 61, and of the lady's, 31. 3s. 'fee
defendant at the same time got from the plaintiff two gentle-
men's and two ladies' tickets fur • masquerade at Vauxhall ;
he also purchased a black domino for 31 13.. 61. Ile did
not pay for any of these articles. The defendant intended to
app, sr as a Greek at the lIIIKUOIIIIIO. The polka dream,
whah was made from a picture-book shown by the plaintiff
to the defendant, was made of black silk Genoa velvet, with
red silk trousers., made ern illuehter)—a noir of black
patent leather bout,, that came very high op, and • costly
gold lace sash. The lady's dress was equally handsome,
being made of the richest materials. Having Inst his polka
cap at the masqiierale at Vauxhall, the defendant after-
wards agreed to keep the polka dresses altogether, though he
bed originally hired them fur the night only. On the 214th of
February last there was • masquerade given at Drury-lane
Theatre by M. Jullien, and a abort time previously the de-
fendant cal'ed upon the pinintiff at he shop, ai at raid,
" Nathan, I am going to Jullien's masquerade, erA 1 want
two handsome dres;ea made." (Laughter.) The plain•
tiff showed bins a costunse-book, and after inspectine the
book for a little time he said he woild go to the masquerade
as • Greek. He wished, however, to take the pictures home
to show them to his wife. The next day he called at the
plaintiff's shop again with the picture-book, and said he
and him wife had chosen two—one the figure of a Greek for
himself. and the other for his lady, a reprenentation of the
Jews. Rebecca, (ram Scott's novel ,f" Ivanhoe." (Laugh-
ter.) The lady in question witness had seen hee re with
the defendant at the plaintiff's shop ; she wore a marri act'
ring, and the deli ndant introduced her ae his wife. The
defendant said (pointing to the two figures in the costume
hook), "I am going to have these two made, and I want
them made -- handsome." Nathan said, they a ould he
very expensive; the defendant replied that he dial not
care; he would have them male first-rate if they cost him
1001. The dresses were accordingly made anal sent home to
the defendant, and witne s ft( martin saw him and the lady
wearing them at Tne hire of the two dresses was
to be 71. for the night, but the defendant never returned
them. The price of the polka dresses which the defendant
had hired to go to Vauxhall in, hut which oleo he never
returned, we., fee the gentleman's, 211., and for the lady's,
2/./. 6.. While the dresses were being made for Jullien'*
m.•querade the defendant called at the plaintiffs to see
what ereereu had been made with them, when, on the
p'uint iff saying he was unahle to go on • ith the m for want
of crab, the dal nd,.nt Minded him 101. The gentleman's
dries was composed of white satin ; the body pert of the
waistcoat was blue. striped with gold lace, with an im-
mense gold scarf, and tact, I for the waist ; the t• tights "
were made of blue silk ; anal he had white Iselin
shoes, with elastic rucking, mode of a peculiar kind of
silk. The cloak was made of striped satin. He gat. too,
from the plaintiff a Greek daggi rof the value of 51..5.. to
wear with the (hell fire's. The lady's drone was equally
rich. Three velvet masks were ales sold to the defendant.
When the dresser were being made another lady came to the
plaintiff's shop with an order fair making her a masque rade
dress, in the handwriting of the defendant. Witness (lid not
know that she resided in Phiroix-alley. She chose to go to
the masquerade as • Cupid (laughter), and a suitable dress
was made 'or her, with a pair of slippers embroidered in
salver; and the was euppliel with a ticket fur the masque-
rade, the price of which was 15s. In July, witness remem-
bered adhere the defendant a pound of scented cigars at 225.
a pound ; they were for ladies to smoke. (Laughter.)
The witneta was crewoexamined with a view to show that
. at the time theft transectione took plate, the defendant had
scarcely attained his ninjority, and that the article a ',untitled
were overcharged, but the cross examination wholly foiled.
Mr. Currie, ter the defendant, said, he abandoned the
' Ilea put upon the record, that the decrees were furnished for
immoral purpoter, and called upon the jury to beer in mind
that the defendant was a young man who was hardy out of
his minority.
His Lordship briefly summed up, and
The jury found for the plaintiff for 501., less 201. w:eicli the
defendant had paid into court, with execution in • week.

SECONDARIES' COURT.
Before Mr. Secondary Potter.

THE QUELN V. LAMONT AND LOCIINER.-WIDT OP
Exrnwr.—This was a writ of extent issued at the instance
of the authorities of the Excise, to ascertain of what property
the defendants, John Lamont and Captain Lochner, were
possessed within the jurisdiction of the sheriff of London.
The defendant Lamont was a distiller in 'Broad-stret t, Rat.
cliff, and became a defaulter to the Excise to the extent of
7,5461. for spirit duty. Kis lathrr-in-law, Captain Lochner,
of the East India Company's service, executed a bond to
secure Lamont's debt, but immediately after both he and
Lamont left the cyantry, and the crown proceeded to seize
upon their property. The present proceeding was, to ester-
taut what property the defendants had in London. The
jury found that Lamont had no property, and that Lackner
was possessed of 60 shares in a canal navigation company,
subjeet to a claim for 4931., money lent by the Joint Stock
Bank ; 60 shares in the British Iron Company, four bonds
for 6001. each, and four for 1001. each, on the Copper Minis
Company of England ; and 100 shares in the Joint• Stock
Bank, value 1,4601.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
Before Mr. Oznamnsioner Evans.
MESSRS. Mg NON'S BANXRUI'TCY.—Thin WAS the certifi-
cate meeting in the cane of Masons, Brother', merchants, of
New Broad•street and Birmingham. There was no oppo-
sition on the part of the assignees or any creditor, and the
certificates were greeted forthwith.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.—Be Pittman.
CERTITICATE OP LVNACT.—Me. Bodkin made an oppli
cation, es collage' for the prosecution upon indictments
',visa two medial gentlemen for having improperly signed
a certificate of lunacy, that they might stand over to a later
period of the evaioc. At present the witnesses were not in
attendance ; and, as there was to bee meeting of the Com-
missioners of Lunacy on Thursday, at which all the circum-
stances of the charge would be inquired into, it was pnwible
that mach exploonation might be offered as would have
the effect of rendering the prosecution unnecessary.—The
court seceded to the application.
IVilliont Stickland was indicted for Gloninuely cutting
sad wounding Henry Can with intent to do him some
piteous bodily berm.—The jury found the prisoner Guilty
of a common assault, end he was sentenced to be imprisoned
la Ilromemonger-lane Oaol for one year.
THIS CHARTIST LYA DERN —The grand jury, In the course
of the day, returned true bills fer misdemeanor against
Ernest Charles Jones, Joeeph Williams, William John Ver-
non, and Joseph F. John Fusaell.—Mr. Bodkin applied
to the court to fix the trial of the defendants for Friday
morning.—Mr. Clarkson mid he was instruct d, on behalf
of one of the defendant', Junes, to Mode that he intended to
have the avistance of one of her Monody's counsel in his
&fence, and that he should not he prepared to take his trial
on the day mentioned, nor indeed during the present session.
—Mr. Justice Patterson said that a formal applieati n mug
then be made to postpone the trim.—Mr. Clarkson said this
should be done.—Mr. Bodkin thought it right state that
was the intention of the crown to take the ease of Fussell
first on Friday, and the others in their ord. r.
NOW cooll'ltr.—Before the Common Serleant.
A CoNVIcT AT LAROR.—John ilPGee, 32, sailor, was
indicted for feloniously being at large, without lawful excuse,
le fore the expiration of a sentenced of transportation passed
upon hint at a general court martial, held at Woolwich nn
the llth of May, 1840.—The jury found the prisoner Guilty,
—The common serjeant, in passing sentence, raid that an
the law formerly stood it was compulsory upon a judge to
pass a sentence of transportation for life upon persons con-
victed of this offi tu e ; and although by a suh.regtient statute
a power speared to be given to r. duee that puniabment,
yet a' he knew nothing of the circuinstan es, he thought
lee had better pass that sentence, but as he eansidered there
were some mitigating circumstances, he thought they should
be laid before the government, who would ultimately dispose
of the case as they thought fit. The prisoner was then
sentenced to ono month's imprisonment, and to be after-
wards transported for life.
The prisoners Elliott and Phiehrops, who were yesterday
convicted of 'street rubbery, were brought up fur judgment,
and sentenced to be imprisoned for twelve months.