The Express.
London, England, 1860-06-09 00:00:00

JAW INTELLIGENCE.
(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
Bitting, at run Prine.—(Before the Lind Chief Baron lug
Barons Bramwell and Channell.)

SWINTIN V. LORD CRELWIFORD.-JLOGMENT.

This was an action brought by Mn. Patience Swinfen
againsttheßight Hon. Lord Chelmsford under the following
circumstances:—The late Mr. Sam. Swinfen, of Swinfen
Staffordshire, by his last will and testament bequeathed to
the plaintiff, the widow of his son, who had pre-deceased
him, his large landed estates in that county. The heir-at-
law disputed the will, and an issue was directed by the
Court of Chancery to try the question of its validity.
The cause of " Swinfen v. Swinfen " came on for trial at
the Stafford assizes before Sir C. Cromwell, Mr.
Swinfen's leading counsel being the present defer.
dent, then Sir F. Thesiger, while Sir A. Cockburn,
now Lord Chief Justice of England, led for the heist-l►w.
On the second day of the trial, and in the absence of Mrs.
Swinton, Sir F. Thesiger, as her counsel, entered into •
compromise with Sir A. Cockburn, by the terms of which
the heirmt-law was to take the estates, and Mrs. Swinton was
to receive an annuity of I,ooof. a year. The lady repudiated
this arrangement, and after various proceedings in the Court
of Common Pleas and in Chancery eventually established
her right to the Swinfen estates. She then brought an sc.
tion against Lord Chelmsford to recover damages for the
loss she had sustained by reason of the defendant having
exceeded his duties as counseL The second count in the in.
dictment charged the noble defendant with collusion with the
learned judge (Sir C. Creswell) to defeat the plaintiff's rights.
At the trial, which took place before the Lord Chief Baron
at Guildhall, the jury found a verdict for the defendant ; a
rule was subsequently moved for by Mr. Kennedy on behalf
of Mrs. Swinfen for a new trial, nu the ground
of misdirection as to the rights of counsel to enter into
oompromises for their clients without their authority and
against their instructions, the charge of fraud being aban-
doned. A rale nisi was granted in November last, and
having been argued in that month and in January last for
four days their lordships took time to consider.

The Lord Chid Baron now delivered the unanimous
judgment of the court. He said in this me it was their
lordships' opinion that judgment should be given
for the defendant. He had been retained by the
plaintiff as her counsel, and the charge was
that while acting in that capacity, and well
knowing he was doing wrong, he bad, against her desire,
entered into • compromise on her behalf in an issue di-
rected by the Court of Chancery, in which the present
plaintiff was the then plaintiff and the defendant was
the heir-at-law, who impugned her title. A barrister
never took upon himself any liability when he accepted •
brief, and judgment would, therefore, be for the defendant,
and the rule for a new trial would be discharged.

Mr. Kennedy, on behalf of Mrs. Svrinfen, applied for
leave to appeal against their lordships judgment.
The application wesacoeded to.

Judgment accordingly.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Fane.)
IN RI WILLIAM DRAY.-JUDGMtNT.

The bankrupt, an agricultural implement manufacturer of
Farningham, applied for his certificate some time ago.
Judgment was now given.
His Honour said the bankrupt had asked for a first class
certificate. He had been in business mane years as a manu-
facturer of agricultural implement., and had omupied a large
farm. He had become interested in some patents for extracting
alcohol from beet root. The price of alcohol fell; he got
into difficulties, and was obliged to call together his cre-
ditors. At that meeting his liabilities were stated at
65,0001., with asset. likely to yield • good dividend. The
bankrupt undertook to pay Bs. 6d. in the pottoil by four in-
stalments. A committee of inve.digation was appointed
a second meeting was held ; the opinion was expressed
that Mr. Dray was a man of the strictest honour and inte-
grity ;and the offer of 8.. Cd. in the pound was unanimously
accepted, all the creditors being anxious carefully to avoid
the Court of Bankruptcy. The result was that those cre-
ditors who were not present were at liberty to make the
best terms they could with the bankrupt; other creditors con-
trived to get more amongst them Mr. R. Taylor, one of the
committee men, who got from the bankrupt a promissory note
for 2,0001. ; and Mr. Robert Handy, who al,c gut payment
of his debt in full. These proceedings threw Mr. ]hay into
difficulties, and he presented his petition for arrangement,
and was ultimately made bankrupt. Everyone's sympathies
must be with a man in such a position ; the only blame
attaching to him was for having too easily yielded to the
pressure of certain creditors. As the court 'believed him
to be • perfectly honest and uptight man, he would have
• certificate of the first class.
___ . .

- _
Mr. Linklater gave an explanation of the circumstances
under which Mr. Taylor had taken the proruissory note for
2,000/. He had made an advance of that amount to the
bankrupt under very peculiar circumstances. It was to
remain with Mr. Dray for three years, during which period
Mr. Taylor was to receive instructions from Dray
in his business. When the creditors were called to.
gether, and the composition of Bs. tid. in the pound
accepted, Mr. Taylor applied for his promissory
notes, the same as the other creditors ; but Mr.
Dray refused, saying he wished to hold Mr. Taylor
to the bargain of allowing the 2,000/. to re-
main for three years, then to be considered the capital
of his son. Mr. Taylor was advised that Mr. Dray had a
right to insist upon this ; he therefore took a promissory
note for 2,000/., payable at the end of three years ; and so
far from having obtained more than the other creditors, be
had not got a farthing.
His Honour said that after Mr. Taylor had concurred with
the other creditors in aoospting Bs. 6d. in the pound, no
circumstances would justify him in departing from that ar-
rangement; but the court bad willingly listened to Mr.
Linklater's statement.
Mr. Bagley on behalf of the bankrupt asked for a con-
tinuance of the allowance up to the present time.
Mr. Linklater, as representing the assignees, wished the
application to stand over, until the conclusion of certain
arrangements, which were note pending, as to the pre-
-11111101 occupied by the bankrupt under Sir Percival Dykes
and which the bankrupt had it in his power to promote.
The power of the court to award allowance ceased on the
last examination.
Mr. Lowrance, on behalf of secured creditors, also wished
the question to ;tend over.
Mr. A. Turner, for creditors, recommended that Mr. Dray
should have something on account.
His Honour authorised the payment of 501. on account.
•

TN RE BARNET.—THZ FAILUREB IN THE S 1101; TRADE.
The bankrupt was a shoe manufacturer of Norwich. The
failure has resulted from those of Johnson and Gilman and
Axtell and Co. This was the sitting for choice of assignees.
A preliminary statement of affairs, prepared by Messrs.
Paul and Turner. shows liabilities of :1,100/. including
accommodation bills for 1,700/. ; asset. about 41:10/.
Mr. Winter, shoe manufacturer, of Norwich, was chosen
assignee ; Messrs. Sole and Turner are the solicitors under
the bankruptcy.
IN RE " THE %CLEWS AND LEAMINGTON RAILWAY COMPANY"

(Lumen)
A winding-up order wax recently made in this case, and
this was the day appointed fur the settlement of the lard
contributories. Thu is the first instance of a limited rail-
WWI cotnpany having been brought before the court.
The order was made on the petition of Moons. Wm. Warr
and Henry Sidney Warr, stationers, of High Holborn, who
are creditors for 1411, and who had made unsuccessful
demand of their debt. The company was registered on the
sth of October, 1858, its offices being at 34, Euston-square.
The proposed capital was 25,0007., in shares of one pound
each. The object of the company was stated in
the articles of agreement to be—" to purchase or
otherwise obtain and acquire surveys, 'section., Vans, and
other materials, and information for promoting a railway
(for the conveyance of passengers and goods) between the
London and North Western Railway at Weldon,
to Leamington Priors, in the county of War-
wick, and for applying for and obtaining as
act of iszliaroent to authorise the making of nob
railway." The memorandum of a...elation was
signed by seven persons, five for fifty shares each, and two
for five shares each, They agreed to purchase the plane
from Mr. A. G. Roxburgh, of Euston-square. The direc-
tors were the late Captain Leicester Vernon, M.P.: Mr.
D. Ham, of Brompton ; and Mr. Charles Heneage, of
Cadogan.phice, Belyraveaquare.
Mr. Tapping said that the company had been formed, not
to make the railway, but merely to obtain an act of parlia-
ment for the purpose.
The Commissioner—They did not seek to oetatiliah them-
selves under a special act of parliament, but under the
Limited Liabilities Act.
Mr. Tapping raid that was so. The company was incor-
porated, and they had a common seal. Thu three principal
promoter. were solicitor residing on the proposed line,
Mr. Edward Poole, of Southern ; Mr. Geary, of Daventry ;
and Mr. Haynes, of Leamington Priors.
The Commissioner-0u what ground do you ask that the
order should be made!
Mr. Tapping said the order had already been made, on
the ground that the company could not lay their debts.
The deed contained some singular provisions, amongst
others that the directors should receive three guineas a
week, and that Mr. Roxburgh, the gentleman who sold the
plant to the company, should haven salary of 51,11. a year
as secretary. The three gentlemen drove-named were ap-
pointed local solicitors, and declared entitled, to profes-
sional charges. Every shareholder of 1/. iu this com-
pany entitled himself, if he chose, to a oornamonding inte-
rest in the railway company when funned. Power
was reserved to Mr. Roxburgh, and the three solicitors
above named, in the event of the shares not being taken up,
to take them upon their own account. The public had not
been cauglieby the bait held out to them. anal '44 seven or
eight persons had signed the deed. He proposed to fix
those persons, as far as he could go. The first