The Express.
London, England, 1860-06-23 00:00:00

iLato Nuttlligince.

EQUITY COURTS.—JuNE 22.
(Before Vice•Chanoellor Sir R. T. Bindersley.)

TN RE THE GREAT WESTERN COAL COMPARE.

This was a petition of four shareholders to wind up this
company. The company was established in 1847 on the
coat book principle for the purpose of working certain coal
mines in the pariah of St. Philip and St.-Jacob, near Bristol,
and operations were carried on until 1857, when after consi-
derable outlay they ceased. In 1859, at a meeting of the
shareholders, a resolution was passed to dissolve the com-
pany, but nothing further was done in the matter. Some
of the petitioners had been sued by the creditors and com-
pelled to pay the debts, and as they could not obtain contri-
bution from the shareholders they presented this petition
to bring the coal company under the operation of the Wind-
ing-up Act.
Mr. W. Young, in the absence of Mr. Roxburgh, appeared
in support of the petition. No one appeared for the
company.
The Vice-Chancellor made the order as prayed.

(Before VioeXhanoollor Sir John Stuart.)
.ZZWWZLL CHURCH EXTENSION AND SPIRITUAL
RELIEF FUND.

This petition was presented by the Bishop of Ripon, the
' Bishop of Durham, and Mr. A. Hinny rd, three of the
trustees of funds which have been raised by meann of public
subscriptions for church extension and the relief of spi-
ritual destitution in Clerkenwell, and it prayed that a sum
of 9101. Consols, the residue of the subscriptions now in the
bands of the trustees, might be paid into the court, there
being no prospect of any amicable arrangement being come
to as to the maniler in which the fund should be applied.
The remaining trustee, Mr. Pascal!, did not concur in the
petition for the payment of the fund into court.
Mr. Woodroffe appeared in support of the petition, and
Mr. Hardy for Mr. Palma. 1.111
The Vice-Chancellor made an order for the payment of
the fund into court upon the petitioners undertaking to file
an information for the purpose of obtaining the due &dud-
nishation of the fund, and ordered that the coats of the
trustees should be pad out of the fund.

(Before Vice Chancellor Sir W. P. Wood.)
TIER IFORTIURASTIRS RAILWAY COMPANY R. =LOT.

The object of this suit west* restrain the defendant from
proceeding to work certain mines situate in the immediate
neighbourhood of the river Wear, in such a manner as to
interfere with the safety of the Victoria-bridge, the pro-
petty of the plaintiffs, and a portion of their line crossing
that river. It appeared that upon the formation of their
line the plaintiffs purchased a plot of land of a Mr. Boulatt,
upon which they rested one of the piers of the above
bridge. Underneath this laud was an old coal mine, which
at that time wee abandoned and filled with water. The
defendant had recently become a leases of that mine,
and in the course of his works he would ueresearily
drain it. This, it was alleged, would interfere with
the stability of the' bridge—in the first place by
depriving the ground on which it was built of the onward
Femurs of the water in the mine, an upward pressure
increased according to a well-known law of hydrostatics by
reason of the shaft to the mine being also filled with water
to a level above the drift ways of the mine, and in the neat
place by the liability of the coal left as supports in the
mine, " creeping" upon the withdrawal of the water. The
plaintiffs contended that they were entitled to the support
which the water and coal together would give them.
Mr. Molt, Sir H. Cairns, Mr. Mellish, Mr. Drskeman,
and Mr. Hobhouse, were in the case.

The Vice-Chancellor, after stating the facts, said he had
come to the conclusion that the following must be the order
of the court. That the defendants be restrained from
taking away any of the coal or mineral (omitting water)
from underneath the land purchased by the company from
Mr. Boulatt, or any land within 20 par& of any masonry or
building belonging to the company, or from otherwise work-
ing the mines under the said piece of land, or within such
range of 20yaeds in inch a manner as to occasion any
damage or destruction to the reilway or other works of the
plaintiff, wiles such notice should be Bret given by the de-
fendant as was required by the 58th section of the com-
pany's act. And that the defendant be further restrained
from working any of the minerals in the land under or ad-
joining the said piece of land the property of the comrsny,
and not being within 20 yards of any masonry or building
belonging to the company in such a manner as to affect the
stability of the Victoria-bridge in tho bill mentioned. But
this order to be without prejudice to the defendant's right
to pump out or otherwise remove the water in the shaft of
the mine.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.-JUNE 22.
Sittings at Nisi Prins for Middlesex after Term.—(Before
the Lord Chief Justice and Special Juries.)

RERMLIORAM r. THE WATERLOO LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY.
This was au action by a surgeon rending in Kentish-
town against the company for unlawfully dismissing him
from the post of surgeon and mediml referee to the
winlienici..win James, Q.C., and Mr. Archibald appeared for
the plaintiff ; Mr. Huddleeton, 4.0., and Mr. I3erenford
for the company.
The present action may be said to have resulted from that
of "Hutton v. The Waterloo Life Assurance Company,"
which was an action by the widow and executrix of a
deceased wine merchant, in Pall-mall, to recover the
amount of a policy on her husband's life. The defence of
the company in the action by Mrs. Hutton was, that the
deceased had made false representations as to his state of
health at the time of sending in his proposals, and that he
was then liable to attacks of delirium tremens, the result of
intemperate habits. The issue was twice submitted to the
decision of a jury, and on the first occasion the verdict was
in favour of Mrs. Hutton, but on the second it was against
her. At these trials the evidence of the plaintiff was nn.
doubtedly favourable to the claim of Mrs. Hutton, a cir-
cumstance which appears to have irritated the directors and
shareholders of the company, and they thereupon, after the
issue of the second trial, dismissed the plaintiff from his
post, on the ground of his unskilfulness and negligence
in the case of the deceased Mr. Hutton.

After the ca;eThaTprOreeEsil;iiitia: and medical evi-
dence bad been called which proved that it might be quite
possible for a man to have ate of " delirium trainees,
to show himself before a doctor not very long after free
from all signs or symptoms of such tits,
Mr. Huddleston rose and said that, having consulted his
client', he was quite prepared, after the evidence which
had been heard, to withdrew all imputations of unskilful.
neas against Mr. Bermingham, and to consent to a verdict
of 20(Y.
Verdict accordingly.

COURT OF OOKKON PLEA& —Jima 22.

flitninp at Nisi Prior in Niddlesex—(Before Lord Chid
Justice Erie and a Special Jury.)

HOARE r. BUSIDI-431NKEEPElell

The plaintiff mistier Henry Hoare, and the defendant was
the proprietor of the Queen's Hotel, Swindon. The action
was to recover dainave in consequence of the plain...it
having, as it was mid, been put in a damp bed whilst •guest
at the defendant's hotel on the 23rd January last.
Mr. Hawkins and Mr. Karslake appeared forthe plaintiff,
and Mr. Macaulay, Mr. Coleridge, and Mr. Maude for the
defendant.

The plaintiff's ease was that previous to the 23rd January
last he sent his servant with some horses to Swindon, and
on the 23n1, Sir Henry, with the Hon. Mr. Vivian, Mr.
Alfred Seymour, and Mr. Sheward, an assistant to a horse-
dealer who had sent some horses down on view, went to
the Queen's Hotel, their intention being to hunt in
the morning. Sir Henry felt chilly when he got to bad,
and he therefore got up and put everything he could find
In the shape of clothing on to the bed. He still felt chilly,
and in the morning he got up, had a warm bath, went
with his friends in a close carriage to cover, and then fol-
lowed the hounds. In the course of the day he felt that he
bad a cold, and in the evening he telegraphed to have •
room warmed for him in his mother's house, in St. James's
square. He went home on the evening of the 24th, and
was attended by Mr. Ericson, who found him suffering from
rheumatism, fever, and congestion of the kidneys. He was
attended by the doctor until about the 18th February, and
had paid that gentleman 30/.
Sir Henry, in cross-exiunination, said he lay awake for an
hour and a half, but he could not explain why he had not
during that time rung for the servant and complained.
There was, however, a general chorus of complaint as to
damp beds in the morning. It appeared that shortly before
the 23rd January Sir Henry had recovered from a slight
attack of gout, but his medical man thought bun so well
that he advised him to go hunting.
The defendant's case was that there was no ground for
saying that the bed was damp. The practice at the hotel
was to air the linen when it came from the laundry, it
being put before the fire for hours. The linen was then
placed in a press within • very short distance of the Are,
the fire being alight generally about 18 hours a day. Fur-
ther, before any linen was put upon a bed, it was again
aired. Beyond this, the beds were slept in three or four
nights a week ; and if by any chance the beds wore not
occupied so often by guests, some of the staff of the hotel
slept in them. The linen of Sir Henry's bed was aired as
above described ; and further, there was a fire for some
hours in his room overnight, and again in the morning,
&MIAs bed waswarmed with • warming-pan. In themorning
Mr. Seymour made some complaint about his bed being
damp, and thereupon Sir Henry said he had had his Led
warmed twice, or he might have been in the same predica-
ment. It was suggested that the cause of Sir Henry's
odd was that he was in delicate health, sad that the
weather was cold, windy, and damp.
The jury, without requiring his lordship to sum up, found
a verdict for the defendant.