The Express.
London, England, 1847-08-10 00:00:00

SPORTING.

TATVERSALL'i—fIONDAr.
None of the parties who were miming on the settling day
for Goodwood hays m yet made their appearance at the earner, and
although one or two of them promise fairly enough, we do not we
much prospect of their coming to Omit. Is Justice, however, to their
creditors, we abstain, for the present, from noosing them ly name.
The betting yesterday afternoon was wretehodly dulk at the waders
menonedp_rlcee
EBtioll HANDICAP.-9 to 4 &est Mathematician (t); to
1 aged Sir Martin (t) ;10to 1 net Grimace ;10to 1 agst Lime-
stone.
Sr. Lnoza.-6 to 5 agst Cossack (take sto 4) ; 7 to I eget
ft7X (taken to 1001, and aft. off.) ; 11 to 1 *get Van Tramp (take 12
eo I) ; 14 to I apt sm. Nunn (t) ; 40 to 1 apt Limestone ; 1,000 to
15 apt Mr Liberator (t); 1,000 to 10 agst Red Hurt (t); 9,000 to 20
sew Jovial (t).
Dauer.-13 to 1 on the field ; 20 to 1 and Loadstone (take
23 to 1) ; 23 to t seat Flateateher ; 3,500 to 100 apt Beveriae (t) ;
2,000 to SO Met The Stinger (t); 2,000 even between Surplice and
Loadstone.

ILO) Intellteinte.
EQUITY COURT.
Before the Ea- Chancellor of England.
01117118 o. SHITII.—PITITION rose THE REMOVAL Or
A OtrAnnuat.—Hr. Gude* appeared in support of a peti-
tion in this ease, for the removal of a guardian who had
been appointed by the court to the guardianship of four
female iamb., upon the ground that the (and to which
they were entitled had not been properly expended for their
benefit.—Mr. Selwyn opposed the petition. —The Vice-
Chancellor, after having seen the infants, and questioned
them as to the abduct of their guardian, refused to inter-
fere, anddlemined the petition with costs.
CLAIRE IL WTATT.—BRIACH OP AN INJUNCTION.—
This was an application for the committal of the defendant,
for breach of an injunction, granted a short time since, to
restrain him from pulling dawn certain water-closets at
Bethnal-green.—His Honour said the order for committal
should be made unless the defendant desisted from the breach
of the injunction.
WALTER V. BRETNTON.—,INJUNCTION TO REPrrIAIN
THE SAILING or • SHIP DIESOLVEIL—Mr. Money moved
to dissolve en injunction which was granted on the 28th of
June, to resersin the sailing of a steam-vessel called the
Novelty, which was about to proceed to the French coast.
The injunction was granted on the ground that the plaintiffs
were interested as second mortgagees, and that they would
run great risk of losing their security if the ship were allowed
to sad. It was now contended that, as the plaintiffs were
not the registered oilmen of the ship, under the Ship's Re-
gistry Act, they had no right to the injunction; and, fur-
ther, that as model risk was shown to tie likely to happen.
—Mr. Nicholls appeared in support of the injunction.—The
Vice-Chancellor said ha did not see that any peculiar risk
had been proved, and he did not think, under the circum-
stances, that the plaintiffs were entitled to maintain the in-
junction. It must therefore be diasolved ; but the defendants
must undertake to deal with the Teasel under the direction of
the court.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
Ix as VANDER VERE.—The bankrupt, • merchant in
Crotched-friars, applied for his certificate. He had been in
badmen three years, and owed about 3,5001., with no-
thing for his creditors. He was opposed on the part
of three French houses and one American house. The
complaint was, that when he was in embarrassed Cir-
cumstances he had obtained clovereeed and linseed
cakes to about 2,0001. from his foreign creditors, on which
he had raked money, and only mad* payment to one house,
in order to obtain other goods. It appeared that all the
capital the bankrupt possessed when he commenced busi-
ness was 1531. It was urged against him that he
had cheated the foreign houses, and that the interests
of commerce required that his certificate should be re-
fused. On the part of the bankrupt it was admitted that
it was a case for a suspension. The inexperience of the
bankrupt (22 when he embarked as a me t) was relied
upon in mitigation.—Hr. Commissioner Hoiroyd said he had
serious doubts about refusing the certificate. Almost a rob-
bery had been committed, and the exeura offered would not
avail. As it was, the case required a long suspension, and
his judgment was, that the certificate be suspended from the
present occasion, without protection, for a period of three
years.