The Express.
London, England, 1850-11-18 00:00:00

Ulm iinteilteence.

EQUITY COURTS.-13AtuaDAT.
Barons TEN Loan Caalcazun.
ROOMY. O. Tii BAST AMOLLSM RAILWAY COMPANY.
—Racsivia—kizovuos Cauuros.—oolll2l4lM—Mo-
=OS TO COMMIT._

At the time, of the court Mr. Melina, on behalf of eons
bond creditors of the above compsoy, proceeded to argue
scat they had a quest Hen or equitable chugs on the pro-
party of the wawa,. which would, independently of the
weaver, the officer of the wart, entitle this to the pmtec-
lion of the property egeine• the er.diter ale..
Mr. Bolt objected to the hearing of Mr. Malls; if hie
dente were not parties to the appeal notion.
Melba, COWL., insisted on their right to be heard on
this motion. They were patties to the cause in which the
' receiver wee eppointed, and were interested in the preeervo-
ten of the property for all the ',editors againsttle execution
creditor.

Mr. Calvert, for the aomptay. and Yr. Dictums, Mr.
Martindale, end Mr. Rosen, for different meditate, claimed
a right far them to be heard.
The Lord Chancellor was of opinion that u they were not
parka to the motion they had no right to be heard.
Mr. Rolt then proceeded, on behalf of the emetics credi-
tor, to show that he bad s right to have the benefit of his
judgment at law auto( the profits or property of the oompuy.
He wu a auditor for cub supplied to the company from
day to day, sad ought to have priority of payment out of
the profits for wenn which be 'applied the means.
At three o'clock the farther leering wee adjourned to
Monday.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.—SATORDAT.
Doors Loam Gummy Ye. Janis Cimino% M.. Jammu
UM Mi. Jana Lux.
TIN QOM! r. Joan Osamu! AND OTII/1/I.

In this ease a rale fowaertierarr bad hems obtained, in
order to briag bite this mart as order made by the town
conned of Halifax, emerming a report made by the finance
oommitmo of that council. regarding the payment of a bill of
soma to the town dirk. TOG question in the cam was who-
the, a Mr. Wayvil, the town clerk of Hslifsa, was mailed
to charge the mrporatio• for his time and trouble in acting
ea their behalf, to compromising a muter is which the cor-
poration was cormerned, and for which, had it been contested,
he would have had an undoubted right to maks a charge.
This monde( the Solicitor General, Mr. Cowling, and Mr.
Atherton, showed mum against tho rule • but as Sir F.
Tbasiger, who appeared in support of the ntlo, was unable
to proceed with km argument, being engaged elsewhere, the
we. was adjourned until Wedaesday neat, and we therefore
reserve our report for the preesat.
Too QUINN T. TOO SOIITMAMPTON DOCK COMPANT.-..

TIXO CA /11.

This came came beforetWirlo7d7hipe in the form of a
spedal saes by the direction of the Recorder of Southampton.
The question foe the decuton of the court was whether or
not the Southampton Dock Company were liable to pay for
rates to the pariah of Southampton the sum of 4,0711., or
the sum of 3.7601., to which amount, upon appeal, the
Recorder of Soethampton had reduced the liability of the
dock company. T►e reductions had Mita allowed in reap yet
of certain premises connected with the docks, but not aetually
seed by the dock soap., for their business, but applied to
other purposes. The Recorder had also reamed the amount
foe which the dock company were rated on seasout of a cer-
tain steam tug, which belonged eu the cloth oespany. The
rmel bed cost the sum of 2,6001., and the commoy bad
worked it with the belief that it would predate a profit at
26 per ant., whereas it bad merely produced the sum of
6161. per moo, and the cost of working it was seven hun-
dred and add pomade. The Recorder had, therefore, de-
ducted from the amount for which the dock company
was liable to be rated the difference betweett the
rem of 6161. sad the 25 per elitt profit which
the winking of the steam tog ought to It,. no-
bead. This profit of 25 per cent was eakulated upon
the sea of 2,5001, which was the amount the steam•tug
had met in the first instance. It was cow eciateuded that
this dedication ought not to hays been allowed, and that the
steam-roe ought to be rated separately frrm the docks, and
that ft.. arcing@ ought not to have been taken as part of the
road, of the dock company, and rated upon that principle.
♦ redeetion had oleo been allowed by the Recorder la
respect of a sum of 20 per cent. out of the net profits, which
(sa we understood) the directros claimed a sight to take as a
reasimeration for their services.

Mr. M. D. Hill, Q.C., and Mr. Mann, append in
support of the rata; and Mr. Greenwood, Q C., with whom
wee Mr. C. Sanders and Mr. Wieo, on Wulf of the dock

•
oempeoy.
The court said they would take time to consider their
judipaest.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.-SATURDAT.
llm FLIPS AT WCPTIIINTTIL- BA/0111 ML BARON MARTIN AND •

VIDDIAll“ COMMON AMT.
ammo= v. ATTWOOD.-BABAOM OF FROMM OF
ilAvalacts
. .

-----
This wee an action to recover compensation in dampen
for a breach of promise of marriage. The defendant pleaned
Ant, that he did tilt promise • secondly, that he was under
the ace of 21 years when he aside the promise.; and thirdly,
in justtfleation— that whoa he made the proems he tetieved
the Oust& w be a virtuous person, but that he had *obit.-
naestly ciia:overed that she was of unchaste character and
candnot.

MBerjeent Allen and Mr. Lush were for the plaintiff,
end Mr..Menkfrey,Cl C., and Mr. Field for the defendant.

Ms. Sedum -igen -stated the cue tether. He
sidertseate sheet wee a young woman under age, who
'by her Mend Mrs. Phillps, who hid mieuesd her as
a damehter, brought this action to recover esurpessation
for tea of the greatest injuries which could be falieted upon
am of her isez. While residing near 11,Itlake, sr companion
to a lady awed Edwards, the wife of a rooter in Doctors'
Col■lllool, the plaintiff, who was then about seventeen years
to age, became acquainted with the defendant, the son of •
market gardener, in tne neighbourhood of Kew. Under the
nadirs nce of his late it'iyal Highness the Date of Cambridge,
he obtained a situation of trust I. the post-office. While
waiting for that appoinoment the promise of marriage was
made to the plaintiff, se would be fully detailed In the em •
deuce. She was at this period residing with her kind hi. end
Mrs. Phillips, and confiding in the honourable Intentions of
eke defendant, she unentunately became pregnant by him.
The defendant was in the habit of visiting her daily at the
15... of Mrs. Phillips, and he repeatedly promised to marry
her 'dissever he came of age, which would be on the let of
July, 1849. Oa his ,mint: gat majority the defendant took
a house, furnished it, and fixed on the following Sunday, the
St\ of July, for the performance of the marriage ceremony.
AU the sisal arrangements were made for that purpose;
beldesemide were named, and the yotog lady's father
was asked to give her sway. On the day previous
to the one fixed Inc the marriage, namely, on Saturday. the
7th of July, when ell the arrangements had been completed,
the defendant suddenly iatimeted that be did not intend to
MU his promise, and assigned as a reason that his father was
atone to the marriage and had threatened to disichcrit him.
He discontinued his visits, and on the 24th of October fellow-
log the plaintiff gave birth to a child. She was reduced to
such a state of poverty and wretcbednese through the mie-
conduct of the defendant that she was compelled to apply to
a magistrate far the miserable 'Dominos of 2r. Bd. per week
to support her child. Tne learned DuPont, after entreating
the jury to receive with the utmost caution the statements of
the persons who would probably be called to support the
third plea on the record, aid to proclaim their own &space,
=Deluded by calling the following evidence, :
Mary Ann know the plaintiff, and have known
her from childhood. Ste is new 18 years of age. I ells
know the defendant. I first knew of as intimacy between
them in the month of March, 1849. She was then in
the service of Mrs. Edwards, the wife of a proctor—not
react!y as servant, but as companion or lady's maid. The
plaintiff was brought up by my aunt, Mr/. Phillips, who
resides at Priest's Bridge, Mortlake, and has a small =come.
She left Mrs. Edwards in December lot, and came to reside
with my aunt. I saw her there every day. The defendant
was in the habit of visiting her at my aunt's. He told me
that his intentions were pure and honourable, that he re-
quired her as his bride, and intended to make her his wife.
He was at that time lining with his father, whir is a large
market gardener, near Mortlake. He stated that he was
expecting an excellent appeal:mut in the poet office from
the late Duke ol Cambridge, and then he should be able to
merry aid keep her welt. He ebtaised the eltisatlon In the
poet office in the month of June. He told me his salary
will between 701. and SOL for the first year, and that the
met year it would be raised to 160!., and every year it would
Menage considerably, as he had strong influence through his
royal highness. Ha came every day, and somettmes cite: er
than once a day. He spent every evening at my aunt',
The defendant was net then twenty-cue yeats of age,
but he said be should be of age on the let of
July following, and that he would marry the plain-
tiff on the Bth of the same month. He repeated this
statement on the let of Juiy, and showed us some of the
presents he had that day revived on his attainlog his majority,
adding that the event was then being celebrated at his
father's house. Prior to this I had noticed a difference in
the plalatire personal appearance; she was In the family-
way. Is the month of May I spoke to the defendant on the
sehteet, and WA him my fears, and asked him what he
propped to do ? He answered that as soon ail he arrived at
the age of 21, when he became his owe gauger, le would
make Mr his wife. No one weld then enamel him, and by
marrying her he woold [eke away all stale from her 41114750.
tie. Ile likewise expressed his regret that she should be is
slat Mate prier te marriage. On the let of July he told it
that he would many her the lellorieg Sunday, the 8.. h.
The defieedeet sod my must took • Mese la Portland-place,
wisgegauth.rese, The &resident signed the agreement
he Mir Man ea the 2ed of July. He faked me to be a
btidereseid, sad be seessel a beMearean. He bought her
eleibeekr the waddles. Oa the 6th of July my east and
Oa dittilibilt Wail{ telly, in the honor. Oa the morning
of the 7th of Judy the osleudant same to me, between
MVOS led eight Videek, to my father's home. He was
is • stoat Mite of exattestent, and said Le was salty that
hie tether had leterfeeed, stating that if he married the girl
he weal& dieisleerift Ma I asked him hew he would -feel to
sesimmaleate the rest to the plaintiff. He said he could not
Els te-.4lwould he too much for him, and asked me to cam.
masieste it. I refused to do so; mad he then geld if I would
not he most, adding, " Poor girl ! Ido eat hum how she
will be .ahle to be.. sip against it." The wedding was to
have takes pines the next moaning. He the. reede,an ap-
poistmeeteis meet use at the ho,e IsPerilsed-plear, the
Nam after ease bee— I met "'see- sad he