The Express.
London, England, 1847-11-06 00:00:00

11UNITN.G AP POI Npl FNTS.

The Brighton holier. will meet on Monday, at Patents ; Wed_
. nesday, at the Race Course ; Friday, at the Dyke—at a quarter to 11.
' The Brookside Wien, on Monday, at Newmarket-hill; Thursday,
at Telscombe Tye—at half-poet 10.
The Crawley and Horsham hounds, on Monday, at Crawley Village;
Wednesday, at West Grinstead; Friday, at llolmbosb-lodge—st a
quarter to it.
The East Essex hounds, on Tuesday, at Great Northey Wood;
Saturday, at St. Anne's Castle—at hell-poet 10.
The Dees Union hounds, on Wolnathy, at Tipree Meeting; Satur-
, daihrEs'‘
eel and Suffolk hounds, on Tuesday, at the Berry St. Osyth
Flat; Friday, at Ilintleaham-parkte—at half-pmt 10.
The Donnington hounds, on Mmthy, at Catoek V llage' edneer
day, at Little Eaton Tillage; Saturday, at Coleonon Village—at a
quarter to 11.
Mr. M. Ingram's bounds, on Monday, at Cubley Toll-gate ; Thurs-
day, at Drakelowe ; Saturday, at Rollesten—at 10.
The Sherwood hariers, on Tuesday, at Mansfield arse;Unw Fri-
day, at Ilambleton-hill —at 11.
The Milford hounds, on Monday, at Wale', Village ; Thursday,
at %Inkhorn Hall ; Saturday, at Langwltb Lodge—at half-past 10.
Mr. Lumlefa hounda, on Monday, at Barnby Moor; Tuesday, at
Dinnington; Thursday, at Arnathorpe Village; Friday, at Nri-
ton Bar. •
Mr IL Sutton's bounds, on Monday, at Houghtamon-the-Hill ;
Tuesday, at Beaumsnor Park; Wednesday, at Orimstone Village;
Thursday, at Holt; Friday, at Brudon Hall; Saturday, at Widmer-
pool Inn—at 11.
Mr. Brearey's bestirs., on Tuesday, at Wichnor Bridges; Thursday,
at Wlehnor Bridges; Saturday, at Sunning Hill, war Derby—at 11.
Duke of Rutland's hounds, on Monday, at Dimaby Wood; Wednes-
day, at Evendan Wood; Thursday, at Cranwell—at half-pad 10.
The Barlsworth hounds, on Tuesday, at Barnidale Bar; Thursday,
at Fenwiek ; Saturday, at Badsworth Hall—at half-past 10.
Earl of Harewood'a hounds on Mond& , at Coiling ham Bar ; Wed-
nesday, at Deigtdon Bar; Friday, at Tadesetcr Bar—at 11,

. a. alp Entrlttgenct.
EQUITY COURTS.
_ Before the Lord Chancellor.

WOOD V. RORCLIFFE AND BUCHANEY.—QUBETIONE A 8
TO IDENTITY OF GOODS AND LIEN ON DlED:.—This was
an appeal from a decree of Vice-Chancellor Wigram and was
argued on Tuesday and Wednesday lad. The main facts as
set forth in the bill filed by the plaintiff were, that in
1837 he lent 1,8301. of trust money to one Alfred Knight, of
Nelmn-square, and took from him warrants of attorney on
his furniture, among other securities, for repayment of the
loan. Knight having failed in the payments, judgments
were entered on the warrants, and the furniture and other
effects covered by them were sold by the sheriff to the plain-
tiff himself at the sum of 9501., at which they had been pre-
viously valued. An inventory of the articles was annexed to the
bill of sale. The plaintiff, at the request of his testate qua trust
(John Wright and wife), allowed the furniture to remain in
Knight's house ; but he put Elizabeth Wright (daughter of
John Wright) into the house to keep possession, and he gave
her the bill of sale. The plaintiff went abroad soon after-
wards. Elizabeth Wright removed the furniture from Nel-
son-square to a house of her own in Meadow-place, Lambeth,
whither she and her father and mother went to reside. In ,
1842, Elizabeth Wright and Knight borrowed money from
the defendant Itoweliffe, and to secure the repayment
thereof, Elizabeth Wright assigned to him all the furniture
in the house at Meadow-place, set forth in an inventory
which comprised the furniture removed from Knight's house'
in Nelson square. Under that awignment, and on failure of
Elizabeth Wright and Knight to pay Itoweliffe, he was
in 1843 proceeding to sell the furniture. The bill
was then filed to stop the sale, and to obtain a decla-
ration of the court that Elizabeth Wright was in possession of
' the furniture as agent only of the plaintiff; and that the
dealings between her, Knight, and Rowcliffe, were fraudulent
and collusive, to deprive the plaintiff of the furniture, which
had been for that purpose removed by them to a house in
Oray's.inn-lane, where the plaintiff found it. Mr. Buchanan,
a solicitor, was made a party defendant in rupee of deeds
belonging to the plaintiff delivered to him by Elizabeth
Wright. The questions raised before the Vice-Chancellor
depended much on the evidence as to the identity of the fur-
niture, and as to what extent the plaintiff authorised Eliza-
beth Wright to treat it as her own. And the decree of his
Honour was to retain the bill fora year,to allow the plaintiff
to bring his action of borer for the furniture within that
time, or his hill to stand dismissed. Itoweliffs and Buchanan

severally appealed against that decree; and their counsel
contended that the bill ought to be dismissed,
The Lord Chancellor, in giving his judgment, stated the
facts at length, and said the decree as against Buchanan
should be altered, and so much of the bill as affected him
dismissed with costa; but that there should still be a reference
to the Master to inquire into the nature and extent of his
hen, be having admitted the possewion of certain deeds be-
longing to the plaintiff, subject to a lien for costs, &c. AN
to the defendant, Roweliffe, his lordship dismissed his appeal
with coats, and affirmed so much of the decree as went to
retain the bill for twelve menthe,-for the purpose of allowing
the plaintiff to bring " trover" for the furniture • but, in
case he should not bring such action, then his bill to stand
dismissed with costs.—His lordship, after part bearing ano-
ther appeal, rose at half-past one o clock.