The Express.
London, England, 1850-11-14 00:00:00

SPORTING.
----
LIVERPOOL AUTUMN MEETING.
111DM 'MAT.
A INTIM SWIZIITABLZI 01 6 rem each. Osso round

end a disuse,.
Mc Staine s Master Demme, aged Walked over.
GRAND AVTDIN BTIINZLI CEASI l'loll HANDICAP Of
10 soya en* sad 100 added ; the winner to pay 20 eon. to
espersea. and the mewl to ern his stake. About
them miles. (14 label
Mr. Suseerre 3t. Heiler, 5 yrs, llst
Mr. Wainwright's Young Database. 4 yrs, tat 411, 2
Lucy Neale was sentehed at 11 30 this monied.
TM stakes were claimed bp the owner of Young Dank-
man, in annequenee of the win of Subduer (whe refused
the tint time round, and wee oat of the nee) jailing ia
to
again when the horses wars amiss home, and, s
hwa.
wee
all-ued by Young Dutelsonsee jockey, erasing
The matter was referred to the steward who, Mtn as
examination of Me otherjoasys, and sone 'deliberation, de
aided that he saw no reason to disqualify 8.. Helier, bat at
the sine Nate he considered the sondem of the rider of Sub•
drier as eatremely disgraceful.
flonanata Braun of 6 son. each, sad 26 Wed. Half
a mile. (4 Dabs)
Ur. Skepherd's Cripple Hate, yn (201.) 2
1
Mr. Headenon's C quote, 2 yr. (MO
sad 20 added Half
Banns* HANDICAP of 3 ens. tads,
a mike.
Mr. Coptland's Aldeate, yes 1
Mr. Meagan's Portia. 4 ps
Ms. Saepherd's Cripple Hate, 3 yin
S ethers ~ad.

BETTING AT MANCHESTER—Tuzsoax.
14,1118301. STSIPLI CRAM-5 to 1 dire& la OW bid.
bst ootbias doss.
Daasi.--40 to 1 apt Ltsbtfoot (t).

!Lab) intelligence.

EQUITY COURTIL—TuraiDAT.
Eras Vsca-Caaseasuaa ILinewr Bun.
ArtozaisT•OiniaaLL V. GROAT NOILTHIZT RMIATAT
C . MOTION TO STAY 811KIVIOTZATIOPI PIODITO

Ar Peat.
hie. W*reaa (with Mr. Mao and Mr. B. Demises), for
the elefesia, moved kr stay of peewee amide, the *Nees-
trsties (direeeed yesterday to Immo ter kernel of ieJaaetiow)
until the impel should have bees dimmed cif by the Lord
Ct.! neither, of which cones lead been given, and which is aa
*pp al from the order grancieg the injunction.
Toe Vice-Chancellor said that some time must elapse
bef. re the order weld be drawn up, and asked the mussel
for We pliant& end relator for how loos they would under-
take not to proceed to output the order.
Mr. Bacon and Mr. Ramiltos Humphreys, fir the plaintiff
and relator, said For ten days.
Mr. Wigram, Mr. Matins, and Mr. Draisea, *obtained
tho' the popsy could only be said to have meted es a We-
coLeeptios of Use 'fire of the iejanctioa. If they bed case
aide red it to be the intention of the wart by the intim:nee
to prevent the opening of the railway for public troMc, they
would, of course, not have opened it without either providing
• substituted road instead of that ironed by the railway, as
building • bridge. Indeed the question whether they should
taLe either 01 them courses, was now alder the consideration
of the rellway COalmshallSeTS, sad it was eto their
not having yet decided it that the premed difficulty arose.
It could not be supposed that the company would inten-
tiocally have violated the order of the wart, and if, un-
fortunately, they had wrongly coneraed the terms of the
injonction, co great inconvenience would arise from poet-
potions's% weal the appeal could be heard, of the infliction
upon theme( the consequences of their error. Whereas, tithe
sequestration fmaed, the traffic ors the line would be stopped.
In the ISO ONO the relator might have (donne the suspen-
sion 41 yesseeedlcgs) to go round a dietetics of 67 yards, or,
if he preferred it, psseiby on some one occasion to-wait ten
atinoue at the gate till a train had passed ; in the other, an
isorssinis Ire would be occasioned to the dehadante, and •
great inthaveniesith to the public by the stomp, of the rail-
way. In such a cue the court would look at the ba-
lance of intooresience. The refusal of the motion would
iadrri decide the principal question, for, before the appeal
mull be heard, the relator would be able to extort from the
&ft adants all, or sore than he could gain, by a euccessful
result of it. The company wen ready to submit to any
berm ; and, under the eireumatahOeS, asked that the proems
might, at ell events, be delayed foe • month.
The relater was the rely person who complained
of the enures adopted by the company. The coma lmionen
el the turapike roads considered the sesommodetion
afforded by the company to the public niftiest, and no
einvnitioa was made except by this pinataff and relator.
When the motion for a sequestration was mode daring the
vicetioo, before the Mester of the Rolla, that learned judge
woi,.d not grant it, but allowed the motion to stand over
till it could be heard before his Roomer, ietimating,
how,eer, an opinion adverse to panting • sequestration,
o circumstance proper to be adverted to, considering the
s.' .nility of the Lord Chaneellor taking a different view
Ir , hi. honour upon the appeal.
Vice Chancellor—The injunction in question was
• ,rd after arguing's% in May last, and was never sought to
b. curbed or varied until after as order was made la the
p.• ot month of November for process of contempt
to -se for a breach of it, and I have not heard
any arpteseat to 'educe me, as far as my lodg-
ment Is thecerned, to doubt as to the propriety of the
in unwise. The real question seems to be that to which I
ad lensed myself yesterday. The argument is this : • right
of way Is the subject of wrongful ioterfereace and unlawful
obstraPiew, and thethupos • court of equity interferes by
iojunetioa to restriis the oseatiaaame• of obstruction ; aot of
obsiremion in • p-rticalar mode et for • particulez purpose
(for ,eeh an or would lest to oppressive and
refines iiiigetion), but of obstruction generally. Their
upon the oggressor chimps his enure*, and addresses him-
self to en ob.truction in a different way, though equally
wro-g sad 1(0%4 Lawler, and says that the injasenea
ougt• to be varied so se to protect him from the consequences
of v.-Istiag the injunction, except in one slantwise mode,
lear'o.g it to be defeated by endless variances) in his pro-
ceedings. That is an Irsameat to which I declined to
swede. lem of opinion that the htlassetiaa hoe been most
plainly brokers. Lad I believe! have heard everything that
the greatest ability could urge is support of the epplicatica
to delay the trump of the process. But I have heard no-
thing is favour of it, and if it is to be acceded to it must be
by .patine jurisdictiou that Woe. I think that not only
polls iaterest., as reptesested by the Attorsey-Geatesi—
nut only private toterrete, se represented by the pleistlff,
arc envies/sled, but that the Queen's subjects at large are
iatetested is a ewe of this description, in which the math°.
ray of • *curt of justice is openly defied. I think no nee
bat bees most. for the delay of the protease, whatever Wean-
veno use may be sustained. The plaintiff taadortaking that
process shall act issue ter tea days, I refuse the motion with
Nets.