The Express.
London, England, 1847-03-29 00:00:00

lab) lintellistact.

EQUITY COUNTS.
Were the Lori amosllor.
TILE ArroaNIST-GeNIDAL e. IRE CORPORATION OF Loll-
LOW.—TAXATION OF Coats.—This suit was instituted
several pen ago to compel the corporation of Ludlow to
restore to the trustees of a school founded by Edward VI.
tottaiin lands which became in the course of time, by accident
ce.desige, mired up with the corporation's own lands. The
parties, in consideration of the difficulty of tracing and sips.sating the ebony lands from those of the corporation, and
to avoid the ruinous expenses of litigation, agreed in 1815 is
a mar remise, by which the corporation bound themselves
to pay 1,4001. a year to the chaVity. To carry that c.m-
promise into etf, et required an set of parliament, in addition
to the sanction of the Attorney-General and of this court,
which they had obtained in 1845 The act was passed Irt
estion, and by an enactment in it the corporation was made
liable to ply all the coats of the suit. It was referred
to one of t'n toting snorters of this court to tan
the coats, and a question arose as to who were
the proper parties to attend the master on the
taxation. That question was now brought before this
court by the petition of the relators.—Mr. Lloyd appeared
for the relators; Mr. Bacon for the corporation; Mr. J. Parker
for the master of the school ; and Mr. Holt for the trustees.
It would appear, from Mr. Biomes observations, that the
whole coots would amount to a sum between 16.0001. and
20,000/., and that to elite that sum the corporation would
have to sell a great part of the preperty.
The Lcrd Chancel:or made swerol observations; but it is
mush to be rrgreti,..ed that his lordship uldem diatinelly
beard beyond toe row of the Qicen's counsel, and with roir
best attention on this occasion, we only heard 4,is lordship
may that the par::as preluly entitled to attend the tat scion
of costs were thew olio were to pay, and those who WCTO to
notice costs, and that the petition might stand over, as some
of the counsel sleeked, fur thepurpose of aseertaiOittg who
these parties ore.
IN TRH MATTEff or LlTlsted CUAIIII7IIII.-BTATOTE
1 W*, N., c. 60.—Mr. *sling asked the Lord Chartiellor'd
opinion upon the poste, of the court under the 10th section
of this statute in this state of facts, : a person in whose
name a *mall fund was voted in trust for the education of
poor I) .ys, died, leasing a will and appointing an executor,
who would not prove the will or renounce. It could not be
sated that the trustee died inliestate, in which cue Emitted
administration might be take* out by • person who would
transfer the trust feud. The r eats. f kin of the testator being
out of the jurisdiction,
.generd at mitrhtration would not
be granted by the lioclesuutical Cot in his absence.
The Lord Chancellor, after looking over the section of the
act, te whi,h reference was made, said he had no jurisdka
Lion to make nip order in the circumeta urea Mated.
FOLIAR O. WILLIS.—OLD Sears.—.9lLL OP Rams.
—The original bill in this case was filed in 1811 for ea ac-
count agaiust the detendaant as consignees and mortgagees in
ou of estates in Jamaica. s* deer was mule hit Sir
r.7l7ner, 3111., in 1824. Th. re was a .rehmariing of OM
cause before Lord Gifford, M.N., but no judgment. There
was a supplemental b;Il to set aside meounte taken ender
decree in a cause in the Court of Chanter v in Jemmies,
on the ground of fraud in the account' which Were tent'', on
the footing of the defendants being eionsigneei and mort-
gagees mi rely, but not mortgagees in possesajon. Both
causes wi ro beard by Sir John Learit,M.l4., who made a
decree for the accounts. There was an appeal egoista that
decree to Lord Chancellor Lyndhurst,.who gave no judg-
ment, and then to Lord Chancellor Brougham, is 1831, who
reversed tt.e decree of Sir J. Leach, en the grounds, int,
that althouch there were Irregularities in the suit in Ja
make, there was no proof of fraud; anskrernailly, that able
smut had no jurisdiction to review ins appeal a sleet*, ;
the colonial court. The present applioadou mass tile a bill I
of review of the proceedings and decreer in bathe the ori- '
ginal and supplemental suite.—Mr. Stuart and Mr. Lova
were for the motion ; Mr. J. Parker and Mr. Gismo contra.
The Lord Charm:nor gave leave to tile a toil of review of :
the deer es, so far as they arose out of the supple-
mcztal suit.

Lear,. the Vlastlwaceaar at Festal
HIATsc e. UN WIS.—PATENT FOR IN/SAVTIIWIP,S, rr
WAKING Inns ASD Sraar..—APPLICATPON, PO Mt. IN-
sowertom.—Tais taw came no upon a raaticm for an fair-sus-
Hon under a notice gives in April, 184.5. The plainde
Josiah Marshall Heath, who was the investor of comae;
improvements in the manufacture of iron and steel,
obtained a patent for the invention in April, 23P3.
He sobsequently brought an action against the de-
fendant for the infringonent s.f his patent. The pain-
tiff by bin specification declared the native of Ite•
invention to be, " the use of (minuet of manarmese in on,
proems wh. reby iron is converted into east steel," and de:- ;
scribed the process thus: " I propose to make an improved' •
quality of east steel, by introducing lode a cruc:ble bars of
aomnr,n bii.tera steel broken as usual into fragments ws I
mixtures of cast and malleable iron and carbonaceous matt c- ;
along with from one to three per cent. of their weight of
earburet of manganese, and expodag the crucible to t'le
proper heat for melting the materials, &c.; but I do nrt
claim the use of any such mixture as any part of my haven.
don, but only the use of earburet of manganese in any pea
ems for the conversion of iron into cat steel." Cerbuiret
manganese is a known metallic substance, compounded of
black oxide of manganese and carbon. It appeared upon the
trial at law that the defendant, after the slate of the talent,
in manufacturing steel, put blistered steel into • eviasible,. I
together with certain proportions of blade oxide of mamma
sale and carbon, and it appeared from the mildew* of the
scientific witnesses upon the trial, and the jury found,
that there substances would become fused at • eerta:n
heat, and would combine and form the nutmegs of =saga-
nom bclbre the blistered steel, which would require a mash
greater heat to fuse it, could be operated upon by them ; bet
it did not appear that this was known to the defendant. The
judgimot of the court, as delivered by Mr. Baron Parke, ;
was, that tho defendanthad not indirectly j
infringol the plain-
riffs patent, for he had never used the sulntance called
earburet of manganese In the mode described in the specifics-
tiara, and that the defendant had not indirectly infringed the
patent because he did not know that the ingredients he had
used would produce the same effect as that used by the plain- I
Bs thell and Mr. Chichester, for the plaintiff. con-
tended that the decision of the court ot law was contrary to
the opinimi of the Lord Chancellor, as expressed in "Manta
e. Folic.," delivered in November, 1843, and also in a re-
cent
ossa or • Stevens e. Keeling ;" and that it was evident
she et, „c the judges could not be supported when they
ticei dila.. the oc:indult had not, either directly or hub-
Toctly. infringed :It • plaintiff's patent.—Mr Walker and Mr.
Holt contended th it t!.e judgment of the court of anninon
law soli the b;11 ought nose to be dismissed.
The Vise-Chancellor said the circumstances of this cue
appeared to him to be quite novel. lie did not recollect a
Pi:, :bar sm.! e.tion having been made,unless the ease of "Kay
o hlnadtelt" could be considered as a precedent. He thought
that • ;At I._ l tees st :tell as the opinion of the judges when
this cs-;; uas before them, and reported in 13 Mission and
Webby, 642,was fraught with very dangerous consequences
to the sigh's ot p-roves, because, although be could under.
stand that the animus with which sn act was done was of
importance to I, considered when the question was depen-
dect upon the quality of the act, as regarded a criminal pro.
deeding, fur then it might be an Lamer to say that
the act was done without the intention of the p.-rty, he
could sot ree how ruck a doctrine was to be applied
to eases of this sort. A person might commit an act 'amen-
acioualL but prima fade he was liable for the injury he had
done. the r•cent case of " Stevens,. Keeting," respecting
thence of borax, the Lord Chancellor had also expressed an
opinion that he would not follow the rule laid down by the
judges of the Court of Exchequer. Under thrso circum-
stances, and having regent to the opinion of the Lord Chan-
cellor, he thought it would be right to retain the bill upon
the file, without making any order for no injunotion,gising
the plaintiff leave to bring an action at law, either in the
Court of Exchequer or Common Pleas.

vetore Vieo-Caannell,e Knight Enter.
PARISH V. DVS NATIOATIQN COXPANT.—This was •
station by some of the proprietors of the Dun Navigation
Company to restrain the company from entering into or car-
rying into effect any agreement for the purpose of selling Or
dirrising of, discontinuieg, or injuring, the said Dun Navi-
gation, or of doing any act for amalgamating the said
navigation with the South Yorkshire, Doncaster, and Goole
Railway Company; and from applying the funds or property
of the taid Navigation Company in the purchase of, or in ex-
change for, shares in the said proposed railway; and from
rising tho red of the Navigation Company for any other than
each purpotes as were authorised by the company's acts of
parliament. With the cement of the Navigation Company
an interim order to the effect of the injunction asked bad
teen made on • farmer occasion, and the motion was now re-
newed. Mr. K. Parker and Mr. H. Humphreys appeared
for the plai-.tiff. The agreement entered into with the
railway company had stipulated for tho purchase by
the committee of management of the Navigation Com-
pany of 2,000 shares in the proposed railway, which,
it was contended, by the plaintiffs, was not done
with the general consent of the proprietors, and was
not attoordmg to the intention of the acts of parliament
constituting the Navigation Company.—Mr. Wtgram and
Mr. Denison, for the:Navigation Company, offered an un-
dertaking not to do anything which the plaintiffs sought to
restrain them front doing, unless sanctioned by an act of
parliament. —The Vice-Chancellor inquired whether any ob-
*Sion weskits% by the defendants to the absence of those
persons who represented the railway company in the agree-
ment ?-11pon the counsel for the defendants answering in
the affirmative, it was arranged that the motion should stand
over, with liberty to amend the bill, without prejudice to
the present application ; the Interim order before mentioned
being continued in the meantime.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
Before Mr. Centedmiceser
A CLUB STNIVARD.—Harry Bacot, came up on his seined
petition for an interim order. He was opposed on th'e ground
that the petitian was incorrect, and that the detin were over
3001.—His Honour granted the interim ord!er, reservinglill
opposition to the final order.
-REOa Lugs Tasuttro.--Bmourt, bona pt, a eh,,,aaalawa,
and watchmaker, applied for his cer..Acate.—Mr. Buchanan
(Besinghall-street) tinwered intim trade assignee and other
creditors to oppose, and stat'.d that the debts amounted to
2,2281., with no seseto. Ito profi's were only 1301., and the
expenses amounted 01 1,3481. He had been in business about
two years sud a half. The grounds of opposition were reck-
less trading, contracting debts without reasonable means of
payment, and that he bad deposited, in December, 1845,
being then insolrant, property with a relation named Hag- '
set, to isltom le owed nothing. He had also deposited
eater porticos Olio property, while in a ailing petition, and
no money had hems available for the creditors. He swore that
was insolvent for nine months prior to failing, and during
this peeled ha contracted a large debt for furniture.
Hailer these 4ite Mr. Buchanan) must ems-
thetthe hemarrept muse •
very jests
• ..-
•wir 'at Pa
Nutt sor tu_ll.._,,:stftop /94
,
4gin,