The Express.
London, England, 1848-02-26 00:00:00

lenders had notice of such went of authority when they mad
their *direness. Having takmg a review of the Gee of th
cam and of the law, the right hon. gentleman said, on the
whole, we are of opinion, without reference t- the question
of consequence, that the plaintiffs are entitled to remover,
and the verdict ought to he entered in their favour. Our
report to her Majesty will be that the verdict o t
ought to he court
below ought to be reverted, and the ju be
entered for the appellants. The appellants will have the
costs of the action below, and there will be no costs of the
appeal.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
law Pane, Sint sia..—Befoss Lord De6OlOSl July.
Lows O. PataB.—SCREW PILOPILLIBIUL—Tbiscase, which
was partly Teruel on Thureday,was resumed and concluded yes •
terday.—The Attorney-General, Mr. Serjeaut Bytes, Mr.
and Mr. M. Smith were for the plaistiff
defendant.
; and Sir
F. Thesiger and Mr. Peacock appeared for the
This was an action to establish the validity of a patent, as
also to prove that the defendant had infringed it; and it
appeared from the statement of the Attern
from ey-reGeneveralrse that
the plaintiff was formerly an engineer, but a f
circumstances, is now a mechanic maintaining himself by his
daily labour. Ile had long applied himself to an endeavour
to perfect the invention of a propelling screw for steam-
vessels. Mr. Pena, the defendant, is an engineer carrying
on au extensive business at Greenwich. As early as 181 a
a Mr. Trevithick directed his attention to the sutiject of pro-
pellers, and invented a screw to propel vessels, but it was
open to oonaiderable objection on account of its holding
backwater, being slung outside the vessel and regulated by
universal joints moving in a socket, so as to be capable of
being moved in Parka/ ways. Other improvements were
subsequently tried, by the adoption of a perfect screw slung
outside the vessel, by the use of a conical screw, and by a
saw at the side of the vessel in the place of the paddle-
but none of these inventions succeeded. In 18.38,
Mr. Lowe took out a patent for a propeller, of which the
following was the specification : " My invention consists in a
geode of propelling vessels by means of one or more curved
plate., set or affixed on a revolving shaft, below the water
linen( the vessel, and running from stern to stern." The prin-
cipal improvement in this invention was, that the screw held
no backwater, and that it was made to work under the water
by means of a flied shaft running into the centre of the vessel.
In the year 1841 the defeedant, who was then in pactnenhip
with his late fattier, built two steam-vessels with screw pro.
pellets—namely, the Nile and the Infant Prins., and it
being represented to the plaintiff that the defendant had
used this propeller, Mr.Cerpenael, at plaintiff's direction,
called on defendant, who admitted that he had dons so, and
was willing to pay 51,, and take a license from the plaintiff,
but he was ultimately persuaded, at the instance of other
parties interested in the invention, to contest the point. The
Attorney-Ooneral said he should call Mr. Carpmael to prove
that defendant offered to pay 51., and thereby admitted that
he had infringed the patent, and it being a ques-
tion whether the fans or wings used by the plaintiff
were at all curved, and formed any part of a screw, he
should call the engineer who made the propellers for the
Nile and Infant Prince, and also produce models
taken from the very casting moulds of those propellers, to
pfUT(I that the p:aintitt a invention was a part of a screw.
Anil under all th. se circumstances lie thought the defendant
did nut come with a very good grace into a court of justice
to resist the claim of • poor but ingenious man, who, ult:y
I hope was in his invention. Several witnesses were called in
supiurt of the paintirf 'a ease. For the defence, it was con-
tended that the principle of the plaintiff's patent had beau
lot g known and patented—that the fans were only the six-
teenth part of the, tura of a screw. and the same d. seription
of propeller had been patented by Bramah in 1785, who
de,.cribed the curved blades used by him to be like the fly of
• smoke-jeek, or the sails of a vertical windmill. Alickson
had also taken out • potent long before the plain•iff, fir a
propeller with ewe revolving wheels, Laving reverse action,
and then fore, so fsr, more complicated than that used by the
1.! tilde; but the principle was t' e tame, with a revolving
ak,s passing through the stern of the vestal, the axis briug
also below the water line. The plaintid had, therefore, but
stripped Alickson's patent of some of its superfluous parts.
It was further contended that the plaintiff's specification
was not sufficiently definite, there being nothing to enable
any one to ascertain what precise portion of the screw was
the most useful, and the size of the blades might depend on
a variety of ciroutustances.—Lord Denman having summed
up, the jury retired for about half-an-hour, and returned
with a verdict for the plaintiff.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
Neu Pam—Before Sir 1, Pollock, and a Special Jury.
LANDON V. BSIORTT.— RAILWAYS.— Mr. Humfrey,
Q C., and Mr. Wood, were the plaintiff', counsel ; Mr.
Crowder, Q C., and Mr. M. Smith, were for the defendant.
—This was an cation of debt for money had and r. ceived.
The sum Fought to be recovered was ,81. 15e., paid by the
plaintiff as a deposit on thirty shares in the Metropolitan
Itlilways Junction Company, of which tbe defendant was
one of the managing committee. On the 4th of Oct., 1845,
the plaintiff bad the shares allotted to him. On the 10th
the defendant, who is a gentleman of fortune, bad his name
placed upon the committee. Apprehensions having been
entertained of the then approaching " panic," the market
warn " rigged" by the authority of the directors purchasing
shares. The defendant, who took an active part in the
company's affairs, drew cheques on the 21st and 25th of
October for large sums, to carry out the views of the direc-
tors. Tke 20th wu the last day which the allottees were
allowed fur the payment of their depreita. The plaintiff
paid his on the 21st, and executed the deeds oar the 24th.
about the period tie symptoms of the celebrated panic
became undoubted. The capital was to have been
2,060,0001., the deposits upwards of 100,0001., but
nu more than than 16,0001, had been paid. A
meeting was held to investigate the affairs of the company.
The inquiry bad not, however, the effect of satisfying the
plaintiff, who soon afterwards brought the present action.
He contended that the deposit he had paid should be re-
funded,Ml the ground that he had been fraudulently induced
to pay it and sign the deeds, and that the real prospects of
the company were suppressed and misrepresented by
" rigging" the market, For the defendant it wu urged that
' that course was adopted merely to keep up the credit of the
scheme, and that the directors were not bound to warn
the &notices before they executed the deeds; besides, the
plaintiff was • member of the bar, and must
be considered conversant with matters of that description.—
Tue learned Judge, in summing up, said the question for the
jury was, whether any legal fraud had been committed by
the defendant as a director of the company. Had he stated
or done any act for the purpose or calculated to mislead the
plaintiff, so as to induce him to pay the deposit and alien the
deeds ? Or was he guilty of suppressing any fact, it being
the duty of the defendant, when ',relenting the deeds for
execution by the plaintiff to make known eneh facts ?
Taking that to be the definition of fraud in reference to
" rigging " the market, and omitting to state the real position
of the company with respect to the comparatively small
amount of deposits paid upon Oct. 24, and therefore that it
was impossible the scheme could have been carried out, the
jury would have to determine whether the plaintiff had
made out his case or not. It was not neceesary that the ac. '
tool position of the affairs of the company should be com-
municated to the plaintiff before he executed the deeds. But
if the plaintiff executed them unler the influence of any-
thing done by the directors (of which the defendant wu
one) calculated to mislead him, and that those circumstances
were withheld, he might repudiate the deeds altogether and
be entitled to have his deposit refunded The jury found a
verdict for the plaintiff, damages 781. 15s.

POLICE. v —_ESTERDAT.
MANSION-HO VSE.—ALLIOID FOROMIT.—T. Page
and J. Nicholson were charged with forgery. Michael Hay-
don, an officer, said—l was sent for to the banking-house of
Me—r. Currie, and I found the pr.n. r Nicholson there.
A cheque for, iv
501. was produced, and 1 asked him where he
got it. He replied from a man in a public-house iu Bishops-
gate-street, whom he did not know, but should know again.
1 went with him to the public-bouse, and he pointed out
Page to me as the person. Page said it was true, and that
he had received the cheque on Monday in • le!ter from Mr.
' Ingle, of Plymouth. In answer to other questions he said,
he had left the letter at his lodgings, but he did not know
the name of the street. At the house of Messrs. Currie he
told the same tale. Upon searching Nicholson, I found a
mariner's register ticket and a discharge from a vessel at
Plymouth.—Mr. Woodhouse, clerk at Messrs. Currie'', said
he knew Mr. Ingle, of Devonport, who kept an account at
the house, and believed the writing in the cheque not to be
that gentleman's. They had received information that some
person had surreptitiously obtained Mr. Ingle's cheque-
I book, and cautioning them upon the subject, and, since that
time, I.e was to use black instead of red cheques.—Nicholson
said,
I know nothing of this man (Page). I never law him
before to-day, when I went into the public-house to get a
glass of ale. He then "eked me to take the cheque to the
hankiii4 house.—The prisoners were remanded.
GUILDHALL.—Citahou or FOUCIEKT.—J. Kayheto
soon further examined, client:A with forgery.—Mr.
tine, n.r the prosecution, applied to have the bills alleged to
have been forged impounded. Two more witnesses were
Isla x imiued.—John Butler said that he knew the
rover, and and that he received the bills from him. The name
of Hall was on the back of each of them. He had two more
bills, one of them at home and the othor in Mr. bill
from Abraham said that he received the 1181. bill
from Mr. James Smith, 14 LU got it direct from the prisoner.
—After some further examination Alderman Gibbs remanded

the prisoner.
V. ES f MINSTER.— Itoenuty AND ARSON.— Thomas
Nears, a priv.ite of the Grt nsilier Guards, was charged with
rohber and arson.—On ,•ic previous night, Eliza Murrill
locked the door of a parl oar occupied by her at No. I, New-
square, Westminster, and seht out taking the key.of the
room with her. In an b-ur afterwards two soldiers were
observed to leave the apirlateut, one of whom was the pri-
soner, and in about ten minutes the ro re was discovered to be
tire. Several psis of water weie procured, and the flames
extinguished, the bed, latead, mattress, and other furni-
ture at the room being moth burnt. It was then ascertained
that two sheets, • counterpane, and • blanket had been
stolen Iron the room, which must bare been broken into.
The prisoner, who was identitird by two witnesses, was
shottly afterwards pointed out to policeman Knowland,
in
the immediate neighbone.o,l, and taken into custody. On
vie churre being stated to ham the prisoner, who was tipsy,
avid bo had nOt been near the pl.:ce.—The prisoner was
remanded.
'CU A MES.—Ronanav I v M'Afartos
sou
charged with stealing 200 ,overeigns, the property of his
uncle, Rev. John Ryan, the parish priest of Atha, in the
ciant y of Limeriek.—Police constable Shene, stated that on
the 17th instant the prisoner came to kis house, and said
he had just arrived from Ireland, and that he had been
lodging at witness's brother's hatter, and that he did not
like to. leave his money there. lie then requested witness
to Luke charge of • small mahogany cash-boz, and left the
house. lie did not see the prisoner again until Sunday last,