The Express.
London, England, 1849-01-30 00:00:00

SPORTING.
TATTERBALLII.—MooOow.
Inherit:Mae mad Geraldiao Imo hocked for the C "ester
Cap at !wlowed prim; the ppm' traaretlow howeeer, were
Ms, mod la soma 'mum. sal lb* foontiow la um" Icetuseee
area the
MOO Tharadey lamt. The hatliag, to heel.
Mood Med! th•
Illattopolltan Medias% ler Loupgaros we, tuchadtred.zi
antatenehe at 20 to I use doing at dee panto leas
flarifaane-e ale. to favour. awl le the early part of las 22f S to I
ma takes abet tloWas; the osewor, beim alterganla
awed carnet*. law tosakel I. Tsev Mho Daddhalea
vas braid 12 ell Deft at SW 2 ate mad wytelme above 20 to
I weld hew hue aim akss 111,111112•1:__.1.1dullkkke Oufalrf.
=SP was takes Moat 1,11110 to fib Its Om about
. sad I,lllelo 1$ shoot the std rrobres demi.
llsraolauralr HANDICAP.--8 to 1 apt Comma (t, sad
ma pt t• ma Lasgema (I). Id to 1 Wit flateatelm (tf, 10 to
1 opt amokblifor (1), la to agt Clorloma (t 20 to I), 20 to 1 wet
law (C, 211 to lope Umtata' (t), 33 to Ist 11c4Inbces (t to MOO.
Cameo Cyr —25 to I apt Blather (t mad aft of).
25 ot 1 opt lagetreme (t sad aft Oft, 24 to 1 mpg CorLdtat (t), 33 to
I Wins T.otar. lets I met Emma,. 40 to I spt lantesl4 SO
to
to
1 opt Denim; 3.609 to 10 apt lialltemind (t end aft 142), 3.001
da melt Iftepafaoy (toad aft of), 1,1000 to 15 apt at.
Lode at 13 apt ram' it and aft tab 1,01.0 to 13 apt DokettihrZ
aft ad). To fladotMe is... wore meratobed at Clieetor up to pool
*Mew emoday posaag;-11aa Wok"' tell, Tau Trrlrate Dodo.
bury llogd.r, Cm, La. yob Tit, John fluidic, and
Ditao2. —4 to I spa D :taw', (900 to 201) t),
7to I apt Tadao' (t to 11101, mad oft off), 12 to 1 apt Ilweimab,
20 to I apt stecopow (t to :Of. sad aft of), 20 to I opt Nanotklet
(t 13 to I. 2) to I sot Work a (t 25 to 11, 25 to 1 not Veal (t),
2.000 to GO We 1191 Ult, (t). 40 to I apt The Kaout, 50 to 1 asst
llsa Team .2 to 1 WI Mattcrer (t std aft off), I.oou to IS meet S
out of IfLualtoo,..lant %C•
it was reported yesterday at the West-end that Tho Cur
W bes watabed for all kb ',gement..

intents:mut

errnscs APPOINTED APTY.R HILARY
Cammear. Lunoues-tes.-11rst Thu/allay. Feb. 8; Second
Beal, Weft:easy. Feb. f 8; Third inal, Wednesday, Week 1e;
Nam* M 4 Wednesday, limas le ; General Polities Day. Thurs.
day 311.
Ntirma....Tne felowing mask tscept seek aa the parties may wigs
to mans Mask present lisk on the poised that Mien have bees de-
livered ((es the potion of Marini to comma not practi-ing in lb.
Court Sir haws Wive., will he transferred. on
the WI filFebreary snit, bed the eielle 71st of the Water of the
Bulls Ai the list of VioaChsassiler Wars; James v. Powell (3);
Walter v. Nine (2); Wlnita v. Ilsetwrigt.t; IPOduinet v. Rankin
iti.iTitwasimesd V. Maras frisith v. width; &nee v. Domino ;
Gieemway (I); IsslW v. Blare (2) • Kirkby v. Nat'l
If); Wye v. GioaKeterr Corpeestkin ; Cross v. ee;igig; Niemen
atWa li (3); leellied v. Chopmes; Delas v. Willi. (4); Smite
U=chhi (II) ; Attermy-General V. Stevens; Yawed v. Chrin
Atebeess v. Masson ; Wigan Lesehee ; Prise v. Berrbigtes ;
Edged v. Waltham; Lams v. lames; Name:ea v. Acrid 4 ;
Canner V. Mem; Damp v. Much (6) ; Bromley v. Wright 4 •
lillane Y. Daviee (2); lhank v. Beath ; AtternspOetieral V. (Zesty; '
Om parades; Damson V. Ilarteloa; LAWSON V. Woe Middles=
Waive works; !fajta v. Kayla; Beckett v. Cawood; Chansellor v.'
Eareerolt; Lie v. Castle; Itentil v. Spry° (2) ; 116Dennell v.
Wayne* ; Attorney.Ommvel v. Bingham; Pei* v. Walken (3);
Athweey-Osneral v. Bath Corporation (2; ; Ford v. Dryad.
(traces Boma.— Beating. at Prise)— OMSK.
Jury causes: Feb Ito 19 haelasive. Speed jury =Men Fels 12 ie
11 Mebane. London aijourazeisht Maeday, Weis IL—pitting*
Itimeo.)—The °ono will sit In lane from The day Falk 1, te NOG-
day, Feb. 12, inclusive, and will premed with the awn paper,
special
paper, and sew trial pear ; and will also bold a gain se Thursday,
k.reb I, ea give Jw(gment in mess geevlously argued.
Cosmos Pease—This court will on Monday Feb. 8, end daily up
b4O ribargay, Veto. !ti, inclusive, bold sittings In bane, and will pro-
ses:tho new Dild iscue, and the vadat case of lioneypenny V.
Des in %.i.dalso give Judgment le cases then standing over foe that

parpron
kaceratna.--mittings In Dew}—Thls court will all in buteo on
Nit. 3, aad da ly to Wednesday, Feb. n, inclusise.
BITTUWIS AT Nll.l rims ug MIDIAMI LAD LONDON, befiNT the RI :hi
Eon Or Virsdniek rolbek, lard Chid Soros rat lier Mayes-
aart el Iseitertner, after Ti,,a ISO Middlesex t
ja
la. Is; annum brigs; Friday, 2ad, mato= and sommou
, 3rd, essis mad alum= jerk.; Monday, acti,
Tuesday. 6th, mad Wedaraty. fat, madam juries; *Marley, Bth,
Friday, 9th, Matarday, 10th, Maaday, 12th,T1wdar, 13th, mad Wod-
nesday, 14th, vadat juries. la Loadm : Thusly, Yob. 15th, ad-
journment day—wanes larks; Fri.lay, Saturday, 17th. Mos-
day, 15th, Tuesday, Vilth, Wednesday, 214, common }uric-; T.rurs.
2h.d, Friday, 23rd, Ilmturday„ !UN Monday, a6th, *lurid ty,
.h, and Wednesday, ;Ash, special jurtes. The court w.ll oh at 10.

EQUITY COURTS.—Yzernumi.
Won the Lor_4 Clow:11GL

1N THE METTER 011TMS WI;DITIO lir OP COMPANIES
ACT (11 0; 12 VICT., C. 16), AID OP THI WHEAL LOWELL
DIMINO COMPENT.-131P/LITI 11' TIM.
The Lord Chancellor gave judgment in this case, sthith
was an :Neel from Vicr-Chaittelior Knight Bruce's order,
direction notain' payments to be made to the petitioner, Mr.
Wyll, hi P., or otherwise that the said company he wound
up under the said ace. The appeal by the con; any was
issued east Friday (see Express of Eisturria. ). His
lordship said the fiat question was upon the constrionion of
the act. The comuuny in this case existed prior to the one-
ing of the sot, the first section of wuich named or described
the joint steak companies to which the act was to be applied,
and this ctumany was not included in that section. The se-
cond section mentioned "all mining compiniee," :out it
was contauded for the appellants that although mining tom-
pahies were mentioned in that section, still it was to
bi read as additional to the first section, and as part of it,
sad from the omission of this sort of compile y which
existed previously—from tho enumeratian in tho first section
it was to be inferred that it did not come under the opera•
tion of the act. For the respondent it was contended that
this company, being mentioned in the second section, was
within the operation of the act.—His lordship having read
the two sections, said it wee importaot to observe that if the
argument for the respondent was correct, the second
section was indops ndent of the first ; the first section mi,ht
be omitted altogether, though that contained an enumera-
tion of the rots of companies te which the act was to be
applied ; aid the other sections were only directs ry. It WAS
necessary to resort to the prior acts to pate proper construe.
Bon on this. The 7th and Bth Vie., which this act was ex
preody meant to amend, mentioned banking compani o,
benefit societies, and but:ding societies, as excluded from its
operation, and also mining companies on the etch-hook
• iple. The Act 11 and 12 Vie. was intended to
inriude certain complaint excluded by the former,
and they were enumerated in the first section.
On compering the sections of the two ac's hislordship was of I
opinion that mining companies on the cash-book prineipl:
taituitog before the latter act, were not intended to be m-
end, din its operation. But besides his opinion on t:i- con.
▪ uction of the act that this company did not fall mud, r its
opera-tot. he further considered the equitable creunietances
of the petition?, ease. It was to be listened, from Ire whole
purpose of the act, that it ilid rot prop sets deal with eu ni-
pont.. Cod were souverut any mere than the previ us act,
w.uien uses expressly limited to companies that were not able
to meet their li tinting. The acts were applic.ble as tests to
ascertain the solvency of railway and other companies.
Am mg the tests so to be applied was this, of a creditor ruing
sod we:raining • judgment against the compeny„ and the
cemp nv's not pay imr within a given time; and so also if a
'hatchet kr was maid, and the company did not relieve him
from the pressure. he was entitled to apply to the court for
an order for windirg up the compsny, and that was the
ease of this 'stowage. The act gave the court, even in that
Vase, ui discretion me to the relief prayed. The question then
same, in& pendently of the construction of the act,
this—abether the petitioner mule out *pupae MS to joinity
the court in l's discretion to order the relief which its a: It _ut,
on the supposition that the company was within the aloes-
tion of ter act. He thought a sufficient case was net made
out tuna Ito he test afteded by it as to the insolvency of
the eidepeny ; there was a mere shouts between the peti-
t. utter, a shantooluler, and the e company. In the ahsenee of
these tests contemplated by the act for the contemplation
el tie touresdiattetion, his lordship could sot feel himself
jarafied in Aldiag the petitioner entitkd to the benefit of
the act, even ii it included ehie company. Being of opiates,
therefore, that this company was not within the operation of
the act, and, U it were, that, the petitioner did not make out
• case for the ex-tciiis of the court's equitable discretion, be
thought the petition ought to have been dismissed with costs
in the alert Aloe, ; and therefore he allowed the appeal.
Mr. Loft, far the sppellants, asked for the coda is the
wart below.—Mr. 4. H. Palmer, for Mr. Wyld, opposed
Skit applieadem.
Tne Lord Chancellor was of opinion that cs the mein
question arose on the c unstruction of the act, which was not
very clear, ht. ought not to give the costs below. The costs
hens, eollree, lip could not give against the respondent,
bat each party would here pay his own costs.
We regret upon this and other ocsasions not to be aide to
eye to the public and the profession the great advantage of
his lordship's judicial reasoning consecutively, as we cannot
catch sometimes more theft one word is a sentence.
Panics ALIOIET V. STEANOII-1 HZ ROYAL ETCHIPIOII.
The arguments to dissolve the injuection—so far only a;
it prevented the defendant from publishing the dormiptiva
catalogue—having been concluded on Saturday, the Solicitor-
Cineural, on the part of Prince Albert, prom eded to show
presets Cro continuini the injunction to its full extent, as
tint granted. He would treat this case both in its facts and
law as a ease between the ordinary suitors of the court ,• and
was anxious that no feelings ofipersonal respect should he
imported into the argument. He relied on the substantial
mews of the plaintiff's case, and required no aid from his
position in a ease which fell within the ordinary ard daily
potence of the court. then was no complexity in the facts
of this ease, nor any aiuncalty in the application of the law
of this court to them. The plaintiff had made a series of
itchier's, and drawings, which he kept as private es ore
well viola, end he wished to prevent the publication of them
by another amen, who did nut allege any sort of authority
for his public uticn—who, in feet, admitted that they were
improperly obtained, nut by him, but by another ver-
so., ids co-defeacant. This person came tea the deo ndane
Stranue proposing to have a joist speculation in an exhiii-
tirm tin these etchings so improperly obtained, fur profit. The
pianutiff, upon receiving an intimation (by • copy of the cata-
logue sent to her Majesty), filed his bill in this court in the
oreito.ry way to prevent the exhibition of the etchings and
the pub:it...Bon of the candisgme. The principle upon which
he at first ask.d too injunction was that the etchings
were his property, without any reference to the exact mode
in which they were obtained by ti • defendants, for the plain-
tiff did not toes know how they came in palomino. The
question raised bar the coon's iatarposition was, whether the
rain tiff had seen property in his works as to satiric him to the
tujunetion. Numerous eases already died to his lord-
ship showed that us author or owner could have property
in his anpublished weeks to locate the publication of them
to himself. The right to pablish was incidental to the right
to tne property itself. The first case, in point of
time a- d authority also, to which tee w. uld re-
fer, was " Millar v. Taylor" (4 Burrows, page
2,308). That ease underwent elaborate niscuseke
especially in the HOMO of Lords, where it was argued is
the presence of ail the common law judge., and eight of
them ware of opinion, in answer to questions pat to thint,
that a man had • right of property and right of action in
his unpublished works ; two more said he had property, but
no action ; and one only that he had neither prequerty nor
action —Lord Marusfield. [He referred to and vat poss;:es
from the loug report in 4 Burrows, and also in 2 Brown's
Parliamentaty Cuss, under the name of " Donaldson le
Becket."] With respect to the eleventh judge (Yates), his
epicion mats man could not have property ia ideas—things
lactelortel—quauld mot be suitatoot leg i oussat In this