The Express.
London, England, 1850-11-30 00:00:00

Raw intelligence.

COURT OF FICHEQUER.—Yisnomay.
swami ma IL Tema% C. B.
lirrnwes av Mr Pam AT winnows,.
Tam AwronanT Cfnusam. e. Awn,.
TM Attorney General, the Bolleitor Chanel, BM F. The.
diger, Mr. Watson, and Mr. Wilde, wen counsel fro the
arm&
Mr. &kis James represented the defendant
The defendant is a soap boiler at Brighton, and this was
as information at the suit of the Attorney-General. charging
him with having fraudulently removed • quantity of soap
ken • copper to the (*nisi room, with intent to evade the
ditty chargeable thereon; and also with having in his pa-
ean= two illegal frames. Oa the part of the crown the
*Raise oMeer proved that having some resent to watch the
proorerliegs t.f the defeudent, he one day catered his pre-
mium uneapeetealy, and flading the foreman in the act of
hiking mac imp from • copper, be made an examination of
the planless, sod direoverrad that the soap charged in the
information bad beet eat out of the copper ; and also, that
• quantity of other soap had been improperly removed by
seethe of two diosioutive teasel, which were not entered by
the defendant as they ought to have been. When spoken
to about the matter the defendant admitted that there bad
been a me irregularity on the part et his foreman, for which
ho supposed he most pay, but added that he knew nothing
of the transaction.
Mr. Jaws, for the defendant, called the foreman, who
magnanimously swore tiat he made the frames without his
maater's knowledge, to make esperiniente, is order to as-
certain how much wet, r tb.y could put into the tallow, and
that on the very day of the eeleare, hi. master having acci-
dentally found them, directed him to bars them, as he was
etre the officers would make a piece of work about them.
Al for the removal dike soap from the copper, this witting,
deliberately swore that he sad the m's determined as soon
as the ofeciy's bark was turned to cut out the soap, in order
to do their master a good turn behind hie tack and without
kis knowledge, and that haring so concluded, " they all set
to work like boys birds' nesting till they were hatched by
the excise mon."
The Attorney General having replied,
The Chief Baron told the fury that they were to decide
whether the defendant was a party to the admitted irregulat
riCes of his mat. There was • point beyond which to peek
a defence would be to Mills with the sense a a jury and the
patience of the judge, sad it was for the jary to lay here what
they thought of the present defeat*.
The jury having returned • verdict for the crown,
The Chief Baron said be had left the qutstiou of the de-
fondant's knowledge to them, an the Attorney General bad
so put the one In to reply, but he =unsay that the defendant
in law wee liable, thAigh he might not have been actually
cognisant of his servants' acts on this occa,loo. To hold that
• man might carry on trade sad defraud the with
impunity through the servants employed by him in that
trade, would be to reduce the law to • dead letter. He
wished it, therefore, to go forth to the public that the de-
fondant would have been squally liable in point of law had
his defence been established

EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.—YESTERDAY.
BOORS MIL RADOS PARKS •MD TES DOM sr TUN QUM'S
Dims AND blltio/s1 LittltULDll, IS Eases /SOS IHC CAST or
O.IIIIKIN
THZ EASTMAN UNION RAILWAY CO XXXXX V WATSON.
—JUDOMINT..

No enamel appeased on mks? Id., sad the coon there-
fore 'filmed the jedoment of the court below.
WATTS 11 SLATEII —THE DART*OOTH, TORBAY, AND

Easvaa Itathwar Paorecr.
This sass same sip oe • bill of exceptions tendered to the
tiling of Lord Chief Juries Wilde, at the Exeter assign, in
1847. Mr. Rater, the dot-admit in error, br ught aa action
agaiset Mr. Watts as a member of the provision.' coassaittoi
et the above rap et, which ww cue of the many &bootie.
railway schemes of the year 1845, for mon, y had and received;
to which the dereadant pleaded that he did not ptemiee. Tits
evidence shooed the.. pr. vions to die 30:h of Ditty, 1845, the ,
line was pre jetted to run from Trareseath ais, Torbay to
Exeter, so as to roust' the English and Bristol Channels.
Oa the 30th of Hay the ph jectors mane the requisite estate
wider the Joint Stock Companin Registratioa Aet, sad
obtained • eeruticete of pr.,voionsl registration Before the
16th of Septet' er • provisional committee was formed, and
• printed prospects' Owed with a capital of 800.0001., la
30 000 'hares of 204. each, with a de posit of 21. 2s. per
Auto The reap (tot contained • list of ;rode opal dine
tore, including the name of the defendant. On the 24th of
September the plaintiff applied for 50 shares is the formal
terse of spoliestion, by which he undertook to pay the de•
posit, sad sips the subsenptide contract. Between the let
and the Bth of ()lobe, too committees were appointed;
a mustier eassmittee of which the deteadaut was a mem-
ber, sad • sammitte to slot the shares. Subsequently the
manias committee iscreastd the notable of shares to
35,0014 sad the capitol to 7110,0001. Tie. sty shares were
allotted to the plaintiff, ea which hte was required to
pay a deposit of (I/ , • ite an latisation tied on failure to do
so. the allotment would be void, and the share. re-
allotted ; sad it was intimated that all the shares
wan allotted. Oa the 11th of Weber the altera
ties in the *chase, with respect to the capital,
was scathed by adverawineat in the newspapers. The sub-
striptioa connect was pessatid to the plaintiff for signature
es the 20.1 e of October, bet an he appliestion some tins
we. greeted to him. It wee, hiessever, ez,cuted by Lisa
withal the time pacified. Ta. webecriotion contrast set
hirtli, inter slut, a apt 4 aid sweeties 700,0001., but the di.
western should hove pews to IWWWW• the same it they deemed
it advisable, sod to nese It ha shares of 201. each; that
&psis el W. 2.5. per share Mould be paid by each share-
MOW, the um to be soder the metro' of the provisional
dines...; Heat the directors shad I have power to adopt
inch INIOSPOS se they dismal( expedient to carry out the
project; to detersias slate., it should be carried out, poste
reed, or sibeadimid; that the i Osten should pay ell air
mewl ems slues, he.. from the depoi s • sad that, I.
the event of an set sit best o. hawed. tie anhearibm
sheald beer their rate .hle. pop. that of the 001148 in-
massid. Toe plaintiff signed the sabscripoon contract on
the 14th of Noy. slier, sad received , rip certificate
is eashaisee fur the banker's receipt. The original
somas for the line. as prepared by Mr. Locke,
the engineer, WAS 700,000 i, • heti the committer, by some
alurreene is ihe pow 51, rs lilted it to 440,0001. Consider-
able expease wits incurred before going to parliament, and
the number of shwa taken not being equal to the number
required ray the stai.d.og order" et the 11 .use of Cassese,
the eswisittee procured 35 pereons to extents the centred
he 6,0.0 additional shares. This was no kaoren to the public.
As application was made to parliament ie the sasion of
1b46, bet the bell wee thrown out on standing order". The
plaiaull won *forwards brought hi. ectien to none r the
mason of deposits be bad paid. Teo facts above stated
being admitted at the trial, the leaned Judge directed the
jury to hod tor the plataUtf, on the ground that the saber
quest alit/ AMP, ass the tact that the seaminess of the pares.
pietas of the II th of October, which stilted that the allot.
meats had bees completed, and wholi was disproved by the
unitises of provisional registration, bad decimated tho
amuse • and that the dirwors were caterquistly set
wheels:it to go to pediment at the !shuttle 's capons.
To tots riling a hi:. of eseepti oas +as tendered on the parted
the defeedist—now the plaintiff is error,
Mr. Crowder al C ' Mr. Yozherbert, and Mr. Wawa*
Enid" appeared foe lb. plaintiff in error ; sod Mr. &siesta
Aiaglske sad Mr. Greenwood for toe defendaat.
Mr. Crowder keying stated the facts above detailed,
remarked that there was no allegation of fraud with respect
to Os deed, sad ke confidently submitted that there wu
so grand for 'eying that any of the circumstances adduced
in 'voltage could vitiate the deed which the defendant is
error had deliberately executed. In soarer to • IllilStiOn
tress the mart the learned gentleman said the acuon wee
tried st Karat IW 1847.
Berea l'arks—And you have just taken three years and
sieves emeattes is settling tab bill of excep ions. (A laugh.)
Mr. Berjeant Kinglike, ea behalf of the defendant in

emu, susiencted theither's was a total lather. of the magi

ilaration on Arch the deposits were p.. 14. Too letter of
applic•tion on whit% tiro slums wer, arceted was in a
tompsay advattio4 .its o capital of G+.00,0001., in 30,000
oltar.s tat 201. each. This was ineres•td to 700,000.1. atd
. .

35,000 shares ; sad, so tar as the alteration of capital was
oonunied, no rostrata existed Ceterterl the pubes. The
learned serjeast dwelt at length on the feet that tie
directors had publicly intimated that all the shares is the
project were taken, whereas 35 persons had takes up shares
accessary to crisply with the standing orders of the House
of Commons, and on a gaareafee Skit it ths project did not
succeed they were not to be held liable for the expenses
Ids. Bann Perk. di livered judgment, reversing that of
he court below, and directing a venire de novo. It wa s
clear th.t the plaintiff had t :muted th, deed and the gam
bon for eitalleerati.m woo this, Aid it auth.,r,se the days-
tars to expend the sum paid in deposits by the puintiff ? The
Mart w.re of opini oi that the threttnri had the power to
do so. Th. court were also of opini,,n that the deed did
apply to the scheme on which the plaintiff originally sittr
scribed his seahey. Prom the term thereof it was clear that
the money was to be applied to the undertaking. The
plaintiff basing eiteated a died, giving power to the dire•
tors to alter the plass and to go to parliament fir as set, dhe
money he bed paid was to go to the objects set &alb, sad he
was bored wider the deed, unless It coal I be Mown that he
was idluoed to extent' it by fraud. Then with respect to
the point that the plaisiff was act bound, unless every share
had Mos paid epee, he should hem takers ears that the
limitation was d ntaiser in tut deed.
The judgment woe therefore reversed.

CONSISTORY COURT.—YerranDAy.
Emu Ds. lAINNEGTON.
MACLEAN V. MACLIAM.

.....
This was a divorce suit brought by Major Mckan surliest
his wife, on the proud of adultery.
There bei.•u uo uppoeition, the learned jades pronounced
for the divorce without pins/ into the facts of the case. An
allotment of 1201. ►limm.y was swede to the trio.
Some formal buaisiess of so public interest was afterwards
disposed of.