The Express.
London, England, 1847-05-17 00:00:00

lab) 'hittWanut

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL.
Present Lord Bron=dLord Langdale,, the Vice-Chancellor of
, end Dr. Lushngton.
MITCRELVA PATENT.—Mr. Cockburn and Mr. Webster
appeared for the petitioner, and Mr. Botch represented the
Attorney-General. The application was for an extension of
a patent for screw piles on which to erect lighthouses, bea-
con.. gee on submarine sand. banks, and fur screw moorings
applicable to harbours and roadsteads.
Mr. William Csrpmael described the invention, which he ,I
said was quite new at the time of the patent, and was the
only one applicable to shifting sands. The great beauty of
it woe its sin plicity. Had seen the lighthouse upon the
Maplin sand, erected in 1838, which was a wonderful strue•
tare, looking at a distanee like a large spider upon the water,
and was as arm now as ever. Mr. Alszaroler Mitchell, the
patentee, gave a history of the invention, and stated that in
consequence of the difficulty of getting it adopted for
light-houses, Re., it had not been profitable to him.
This evidence was camphorated by his son, Mr.
John Mitchell.—Mr. James Walker, C.E , stated that the
Trinity-house, at his recommendation, had erected tho light-
house on the Maplin sand ; and he had been perfectly satis-
fied with it. A beacon was also erecting upon Mr. Mitchell's
screw piles on the Tongue sand. It wee the mast economical
and effectual made of forming a foundation on banks covered
by the Ea that had yet been discovered ; and there were
other spots imperfectly lighted to which it might be applied
with adeantage.—Mr. S. P. Bidder said he was resident
engineer of the Fleetwood-on-Wyre Railway, and had
charge of the lighthouse erected by the Messn. Mitchell.
in Morecombe Bay, in the year 1840, since which
time it had required no alteration or repair, giving
general satisfaction. It was the beet light on the
coast. There was generally a very heavy sea on
that part of the coast, but the piles were so placed that the
waves went through them, and so lit le vibration was pro-
duced, that it did not affect the clock in the Tower.—Mr.
Jackson, accountant, put in the aceoun's, and Ale. Brooks,
C. E. spoke to the value of Messrs. Mitchell's services,
which, if 'flowed for at the most moderate rate, would leave
no profit upon the gross amount received.
Lord Brougher°, in giving judgment, said, that from the
peculiar nature and merit of the invention, and considering
that it was one which would not be expected to come into
general use for some years, their lordships had come to the
decision of recommending to her Majesty to extend the
patent for the full term prayed for, fourteen years.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH—GUILDHALL.
Nut Pura—Before Mr. Justice Erie and a Common Jary.
WALLINGTON V. LAte --Acnom AGAINST A PRO-
VISIONAL COMXITTERIIAN.—MT. James and Mr. F. Russell
appored for the plaintiff in this case, who is a surveyor, and
brought this action to recover • sum of 191. 19s. from the
defendant, Sir Henry Lambert, for maps supplied to the
Great Welch Junction Railway Company, of the provisional
committee of which the defendant was • member. The fact
that the work was done, the rinsonablencss of the sum de-
manded, and the position of the defendant as member of the
previsional committee, were admitted. The other evidence
was, that the defendant, having accidentally called at the
office of the company, took the chair at • meeting of the
committee, of the business transacted at which no account
was given, neither could the precise day of that meeting he
ascertained. Circumstance', however, were stated, which
made it probable that the meeting took place alter the order
for the map", which had been given by the promoter" and
ice consulting engineer, had been received by the plaintiff.
It appeared also that the defendant had paid some of
the persona who had chants on the company.—Mr. Hum-
trey, Q.C., with whom were Mr. Carrington and Mr. Peacock,
foe the defence, insided that, as the defendant could not be
bound by a contract made before he had acted, and the pay-
ments had been made when the law was uncertain, and he
himsi If under a misconception of his liabilities, he was en.
titled to a verdict.

Mr. Justice Erie told thejuron that the question for them
was, whether the fact that the defendant had taken the chair
at the meeting, coupled witth his being a member of the
committee, which of itself amounted to nothing, showed that
he had authorised the promoters and the surveyor to pledge
his credit to the plaintiff.—The jury at once returned a ver-
dict for the defendant.