The Express.
London, England, 1851-05-30 00:00:00

LITERATURE OF ENGLAND.

TO Tin EOITOII or THE EIPII3II.

SIR,--You will he glad to hear that an idea has
just been broached in a cluster of the Midland towns to
give two great literary festivals to the foreigners now
among us, in honour of two men who Rave made English
bterazare most widely known, namely, the immortal Shakes-
peare aud,Dr. Johnson.
The great Exhibition hardly recognises with sufficient
pn,mbe 11Ce the literature of our own or other countries.
lksikhoi ling is displayed. hut nut authorship--booksellers
stand forward, but authors are out of sight. Surely the
leadiva library foraigners now in London would like to
ligroia acquainted with the interior of England, and so it
I. thou4lit that Warwick and Stratford-upon-Avon may en-
gage t 1,.• attention of one monster trip, and Birmingham and
Liehlle4l another, to say nothing of a view of Drayton
Manor It is proposed that a procession and soiree take
place sio the r,•spective days, both at Stratford and at Lich-
field, in pr.ference to a dinner and toasts, as most agreeable
to the ei-touns of our foreign brethren. It has been sug-
gested :Is., that at the same time, the corps dramatique of
Devoirliae House do also display their tactics before pro-
viacial in these towns. AB praise be to Sir E. L.
Bulls er
The it.law of Shakespeare is world-famous; ouch good
wine 1,, eds no bush. And the great, uncouth, affectionate
Johnerei has wonderfully been brought forth °flat°. Macau-
lay has well slaughtered poor old Croker for his blunders
in his poit: eons edition of Boswell, but Carlyle and others
hale dour much for Johnson in English minds—and espe-
cially a me w seark on his religious life and death (published
by Bentley, I think) has raised him in the esteem of the
honigly pions.
I would that foreigners could explore our country districts
mere ilioroughl/ii—wpreially the mmmiticent scenery of the'
county 01 Der , its Matlock, Buxton, with such places as
Chats. vt'i and *dam Hull.
Certadsly, with proper economy of rail and time, much
might be wen in a short period. At all events, the two
euntemplat d trips may be very satisfactory.
1 am, sir, your humble servant,
A MIDLANDER.
Aabboorne Villa, Derby, May 28.

Rey. J W. Berryman, to Newton Curacy, Wisbeath,
Cambridge.,lire.
Rev. D. &lwuds, to Festiniog Rectory, with limn-
tyro,/ ( limy, Merionethshire; value, all., and residence;
patron, Manor of Bangor.
ker. A. Urtdiths' to LlaneUy Perpetual Curacy, Brecon;
value, goal.. and residemte • patron, Duke of Beaufort.
Iti.v T. Horn, to St. Thomas's &dory, Harerfordwest ;
value, :a9' • patron, Lord Chancellor.
Ites w U. Phillips, to Amrosth Vicarage, Pembroke-
shire ; value, 1121.; patron, Bishop of St. David's (by

~~C~:ICii~.

Dean ry Rural a( inre;le;,aiocese Oxford; an. T.
Horn I.r.nnotrd.
Galk • Vicarage. Ring's County, 'diocese Meath ; petzen,
Bishop et livath; ltay. J. P. Holmes doormat.

Town.—An ingenious piece at Machin:
ism has beau invrated by Mr. Robert Drown, North BeWw,
intended to facilitate the lighting of railway snit
noel Minya in expand situation& Is stormy vmMisar
masailsy is often !stories's& In ruing the deems'
signal hap lighted 41111111:461411 i4s
dry"l3=pssisk k do Nadia (often at
aialikwble age.lo. Om% nul earrilaa it
link Is • beg to be on Ow ipm. This liesbus
an saSsiiiisre of ani At intim lamp di
Irma is avid by the %Mb% PilltuiPtita fifth svps•
maw seined to.-410101110106

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.-.YESTERDAY.
11111MPOS a•roo.—Rvoas LORI, ICITICI
PO; MO. Jtt MOM COURIMI, AND 1111. Jane. Elll.ll.

•
Tim QUERN V. TRT GUARDIANR Or TR■ POOR Or Till
PARISI! Or ST. MAHT&N-IY•TI/L-PIRU/tl.

air Fitzroy Kelly and Mr. Puhley appeared to show cause
against a rule which had been granted, calling upon the de-
(cadent' to show cause why • writ of mandamus should not
be issued commanding them to proceed to the election of a
clerk to the board of guardians. It appeared that the parish
of St. Martins had been placed by the poor law COlllll2ll-
- under a board of guardians, who were by them
directed to appoint a clerk and assistant clerk to the board.
The office of clerk had been held by • solicitor, but upon
the retirement of the late clerk (Mr. Le Breton) the board
came to a resolution to amalgamate the two offices. The
election of a new clerk took place in February last, at s
meeting which was attended by the chairman and 21 other
pardsano, and there were four candidates for the office. Each
womb,' of the board wrote on a slip of paper the name of
Idle Modidate fur whom he wished to vote, and these papers
terra then put into • hat and given to the chair-
s.% who did not himself vote at all, but he
entindeed the papers given in, and declared that there
were eleven votes for Mr. Griffiths and ten for Mr.
field : it was then proposed and seconded that Mr. Danger-
field:
should be elected clerk. The chairman put this motion,
and a majority of those present and voting held up their
hands in favour of it. The contrary question was not put
at all, but Mr. Griffiths was declared duly elected; and be
had exercised the foe from that time to the present, with
the sanction of the poor law commissioners. The present ap-
plication wasmade on behalf of Mr. Dangerfield, who sought
to impugn the validity of that t lection on the ground that the
votes were taken by ballot, which he contended was illegal,
that the chairman had omitted to put the negative of the
question to the meeting, which he contended was en irre-
gularity; and, lastly, that the guardians were bound to elect
a solicitor, because the poor-law commissioner, hail imposed
duties upon the person filling the office which could not be
performed by any other than a solicitor. It was now con-
tended that mandamus was not the proper remedy but that
an information in the nature of a quo warrant° should
have been filed.
Lord Campbell said that the CM of "Harley T. the
Queen" (12 Clarke and Fiunclly), was very like the present,
and it was there Betided by the House of Lord.., that an
information in the nature of a quo warrant° would lie.
Sir F. Thesiger and Mr. Brtunwell, contra, contended that
there was no invasion of the franchise of the crown in this
case, sad that quo warrant° was therefore not the proper
remedy.
Mr. Justice Pattcson said that he had always acted upon
that doctrine, in common with Mr. Justice Taunton and
Lord Denman; but be considered that their opinion was
over-ruled by. the ease of " Harley v. The Queen."
Sir Frederick Thesiger then contended that this was not
an office of a public nature, and therefore mandamus was
the proper remedy.
Lord Campbell said he was of opinion that the rule mud
he discharged, upon the ground that the proper remedy bad
not been adopted. The office of clerk was now full. And
it must be taken as an established rule, that if the proceed.
iug by quo warrant° would lie, that proceeding must be
adopted, and not the remedy by mandamus. If this age
had arisen before that of Harley v. the Queen," he should
have been much perplexed by the conflicting decision • but
this court wan bound to follow the rule there laid down,
which was, that when an office was of a public nature and
created by act of parliament, though there had barn no
usurpation of the franchise of the crown, an information in
the nature of a quo warranto would lie. Formerly a dif-
ferent rule had been followed. The present office, though
not named in the act of parliament, WU in fact created
by. it, for general powers were given to the poor law com-
missioners, and under those general powers they were en-
titled to create this office. The tenure of the office was also
during good behaviour, for the commissioners had only
power to remove for incapacity or misconduct. Then was
the office one of a public nature ? It mighbbe difficult is
all eases to determine what would constitute an office of a
public nature, but this was quite as much so as that which
the House of Lords held to be so in " Harley v. the Queen."
The public were interested in the functions to be discharged
by the clerk ; and he thought, therefore, that a quo war-
ranto was the proper remedy ; and he could not regret
coming to that conclusion, as he thought the questions in-
volved in the case might be tried much more conveniently
in that form of proceeding.
The rest of the court concurred.
Lord Campbell added that he wished it to be understood
that he was not ism, ...nig an opinion that a quo warrant°
would lie in respect of all the offices created by the poor law
commies' .n. It would not lie in the case of a menial
office such as nurse. _ _ _

Hale for mandamus discharged.
TIP QUOIN (IN TOR RILATION or Haecocu) r. CROSS.
Mr. Watson, Q.C., moved for a rule sidling upon the de-
fendant to show cause why an information in the nature of
a quo warranto should not be filed against hini,calling upon
him to show by what authority he claimed to act as a mem-
ber of the Board of Health of the City of Ely. It ap-
peared by the affidavits that the Board of Health at Ely
was formed under an order of Council, dated January 30,
IMO, and was directed to consist of fifteen persons, five of
whom were to retire annually, the qualifications of per-
mits to be elected members of the board were regu-
lated by 11 & 12 Vic. e. 63, s. 12 to 19, and the qualifica-
tion of the voters was determined by section 20. The elec-
tion now in dispute took place in March last, when there
appeared for Haycock 374 votes and for Cross 379,
whereupon Cross was declared duly elected. The majority
for Cross was, however, disputed by Haycock, upon the
ground that a number of good votes were kmdered for him
and rejected, and a number of bad votes received for Cross.
The learned counsel stated that there could be no
doubt that quo warrant* was the proper remedy asthe board
of health possessed the power of raising rates and doing
other acts which were clearly of a public nature. And the
office was. therefore a public one, within the decision of this
House of Lords in Harley a. the Queen."
Rule granted.
COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.—YESTERDAY.

SUOMI Ka. Colotnaowas Inst.
IN NE DitionT—ALLEOZU " STOLEN " DILLS.

This was the last examination meeting in the case of H.
Bright, corn merchant, of Malden. The amount of failure
was not large, but it transpired that the bankrupt's liabili•
ties arose upon a bill which had been obtained from him by
the notorious Ilanee. The balance-sheet, prepared by Mr.
Thomas, of Gresham-street, extended over 1.1 years prior
to the failure,' and contained the following items .—To
creditors, 6651. • liability, 2671.; profits, 1831. ; capital,
48/. Good debts, 21. 5s ; property, none ; trade expenses,
1611.; personal ditto, 1471.; interest, 68/.; losses, 44i1. In
reference to the liability, the bankrupt stated in his ac-
counts that it arose upon an acceptance of his for 150/.,
which had been obtained from him by fraud by J. H.
Hance, new under sentence of remand from the Insolvent
Debtors' Court. On this hill he had been sued by Mr.
Blackburn, merchant, of London, the holder; judgment
had been given against hint, and the costs amounted to
1171., making the total liability 2671.
Mr. Crick supported the bankrupt.
Mr. DuMeld, for the assignees, offered no opposition, and
he passed.
Mr. Lawrence tendered a proof for Mr. Blackburn, on
the judgment obtained against the bankrupt on the bill.
He stated that the consideration for the bill, which was the
delivery of good., had been fully proved at the trial ; and
the bankrupt had produced no evidence to show the
contra
ry
His
is.Honour did not think that the bankrupt would be
charged with making a vexatious defence, considering the
way in which the hill had been obtained from him. lie
saw no reason now for rejecting the proof.
Banns Ma tomemsuroas Govuilut.
114 RE BED7OItD.—POWER 07 THE COIMT TO DISCHAUGZ

FROM CUSTODY.
The cue of this bankrupt, who was a publican and
farmer, at Fen Drayton, in Cambridgeshire, came before
the court about 15 months ago, when his examination was
adjourned sine die, without protection. On the 22nd April
following be was arrested and imprisoned in Cambridge
Castle, where he has ever since remained.
Mr. Naylor now applied to the court for an order for his
discharge, under the 259th section of the late act, which
provides "that if a bankrupt shall be taken in execution,
upon the refusal of protection, or after the refusal or sus-
pension of his certificate, he shall not be discharged from
such execution until he shall have been in prison for the full
period of one year, except by order of the court."
His Honour suggested whether the order ought not to be
made by the court from which the espies had issued, the
Exchequer.
Mr. Naylor said that point had already been determined
by Mr. Justice Patteson, in " Walker v. Edmondson," re-
ported in the last number of the Law Journal, which de-
cided that all matters relating to the discharge of bank-
rupts were transferred to the Court of Bankruptcy.
Mr. Cole, for the assignees, contended that, although the
bankrupt might be entitled to his discharge, there was still
power in the court to detain him in custody fur not having
complied with the order of the court as to filing the
accounts.

His Honour, after consulting with Mr. Commissioner
Holroyd, decided this application under the 259th, and not
under the 112th section, as to which power of discharge might
admit of a different construction. His opinion, he wished
it to be understood, was based upon the '2s9th section only.
The question was, whether a debtor, having been in prison
for the full period of one year, was entitled to discharge
under the terms of the 259th section of the Bankrupt
Law Consolidation Act. The opinion of Mr. Conraissioner
Holroyd was, that in strictness the jailer required no order
at all, for he was hound to take notice of the statute,
which did not award more than a year's imprison-
ment. But the jailer might not so construe the
Act, and the question was whether this court ought to
make the order. lie was of opinion that the court had the
power of making the order; and as the question related to
the liberty of the subject, he thought that a literal con-
struction ought to be put upon it. Lord Tenterden
was of opinion, in the case of " Lcvris and Manley,"
that upon an act passed to relieve persons in cus-
tody for debt, the act ought to receive a large and liberal
construction. There was another ground on which he was
hood to take this view. It was the first act of parliament
which interfered with what might be called the sacred
pdmipie previously known to the Bankrupt Law—that
sr alsellaa—that a creditor must elect, and could not have
at nee two remedies against the debtor. That was not a
pert stile Coesolidation Act, for a creditor having got all
be seell tea a debtor might take proceedings against hie
pawl. That band was a very severe provision, and eon.
insted with or ihs principles of law acted on in this and all
ether emir lbw the time of the bankruptcy the creditor
W bus ibilaimei t• auks his elation, sad dim' Wakes

1