The Express.
London, England, 1858-05-22 00:00:00

COURT OF QUERN'S BENCH.

(Sittings in Banoo„ In Trinity Term—Befors Lord Camp-
bell, and Junior Coleridge, Brle, and Crompton.)
This wan the first day of Trinity Term. The Court sat
shortly after 10 o'clock.

PISI/OAR LIABILITT ACT.
This action was brought by the painting( Mts. Penrose,
against the putt,d John Martin, the suffeszy of the
Halm& Steam pany (limited), to recover a sum
at marry, kr coals supplied to that
Mr. M Sank now moved for a =grammes of hart
reserved by Lord Campbell, who tried the oast et Onildhall,
with • view to the determination of a Fiat of law, which
MOO WAN the Limited Liability Act. It appeared that the
plaid! draw a bill of exchange for the amount of the coals
en the company, but without describing it as " limbed,"
and the defendant accepted it for the company is thus
"seespeed payable at Mama. Barclay sad CO., hme,
John Mazes, cemetery to the said company."
he amiss was set bowed upon the acceptance, bat adder
• motion el the act while made the officer of a company
prreasally liable alder minutia circumstances, end the
quake now raised was whether the defendant in this case
could be held personally liable for the amount of the bill.
The 31st motion of the to question—l 9 and 20, chap. 47
provided that if any °Maw of a company established under
the act earned any bell of exchange or protumsory note, ho,
withnut swains the name of the company, with the word
" limited," he should be liable to a meaty of 501., sad should
further be personally liable to the holder of such bill ar nets,
unless the same were paid b the commay. This bill wee
drawn by the plaintiff Mirseff en the eocopeay, but she had
omitted the word "
Lord Campbell—There wee a plea that abe drew the bill,
and than a replketket that when she drew it she did not
know that the compony was established on the limited
liability principle, and this lan OM wee bend in her
favour. His lonialidp then stated, that se there was a do•
WISZTST raising the same questko, it would be more octave-
Meat if both mess sem en at the lame time, seal thinkers
the
kale Mt
?NZ QUINN V. WANDSWORTH DISTRICT BOARD OF WORKS.
. .

This was • ride ()Demised at the Instance of the Middlesex
Waterworks Com_ piny, calling upon the Wandsworth Dis-
trict Board of Works to show canoe why • mandamus
&said sot Inns, commanding them to hear an application
nab in ten behalf to be exempted from • .r-
-kin rob We Ia March last, and also commanding
Mem te mompt Ms smpasy from that rate.
Xt. Lee new bawd mass against the rule. With re-
gard es the rat petal, be referred to affidavits which showed
that the Dosed el Works bad beard the orator, sod stud"-
sated ft, and that they bad debbniatky sem to the
tied die Walsrweilts Gaynor bat as Add le he
angled ken dr Ma Winsrespect is Ise 11111111 Si question,
the harmed woad add tbe Hoard of Week, mks the
provisions of the Mooropotis Load Manesemat ark
an order upon the OVIMIOIII directing then to tabs Ss rate
in gaieties for sewage, lightlag.enigenwal /apses tinder
that act the overseers way required as nab, tr MI en all
the rotatable property in the porta, and be eastendisd that it
was ler the amuses not the board Is aseartais what property
*NM to be ezeopted.
Mr. W. William followed on the seas aids.
. _

Mr. Hoddisehme, on the part of the Waterworks Com-
riListibeeillied that upon the &Mavis; there had been a
refusal by the district based to hear their applica-
tion'. Tb. Walarmirke Com ob. ted to the rate., es
the pawed that they derived as t, and they had offered
apes le a medal ease, in order to hove the point decided;
bet the dileist bawd refused te amount, alleging that they
bed themselme deeided the metim.
Mr. Meld wee she herd le sapped of the rule.
Lard Campbell NM It woe meowed in the affidavits did
am behalf ad dm Welerembe Oasepay, that it wee oblige-
es,' an the Astrid beard te make memptiom from the pay-
ment of rail, but the Ma seri= of the am clearly Li
that to their dieradea. An ee lie tranfeellions
Ito wee of opus. Nat there bed bees as 66 be.
Not only the fame, htst the law 111 Ne sediest were sabsdeted
to the hoard. and saw eseiderig them tirry more to the
conclusion that the ailment woe set sedied Mae,
sad whether that decision woe right or wrong, this emst had
So jurisdiction.
Hale discharged with coats.