The Express.
London, England, 1850-11-15 00:00:00

!!!''

SPORTING.

TATTERSALL'S —ThozsmiT.
WARWICK HANDICAP.
, 7to 2 art Mehl 12 to 1 aitt The Castle
, 10 to 1 Chief Justice (t) I 16 to 1 Clothwolker (t)
IO to 1 Cockagoooth
Nothlog la favour bat Donal.
CHRSTBR CUP.
1.000 to 25 laid 'gains. C -*Back, and 1,000 to lb each snot
Hashbcroorh, Woolwich. Rua" Brother 'n Dough, Wit.-
dioeharalz, Donna, and Clarioat and 1,000 to 10 against
Wiadbound.
DERBY.
Tho only bat laid was 2000 to 60 agairst Lightfoot.
. A moll attendance, and little or nothing doing.

CREWE STEEPLE CHASES—THIIRSDAT.
Pura was mos by Ms S.aadard, bsatiaa
two others, who fril at lb. pew! Fines.
F►artraa' PLAT. wan won by Toe Standard, beating
Yorksitimaan sad aootbss.
SACK Perez= WO webby ICSOillk, besting four others
shoe a flan nor.

?La) intelitgen ce.
EQUITY OUURTB.—YorrisDAT.
Isms TIM Cuascason.
BnuILL tr. TUB LADY ABIOLILMI RAILWAY CONTANT.-
11witvia.—Costraters.
Sir Fitzroy Roily ~amen hie orraISOIM h Ml9poll of the
isotn 'Matt he 'pima the Am day at term, and stood ad
journal situ.. It appeared that the bill was filed by certain
mutant' and bond creditors of the above company to a very
large amount, to Wears the ultimate payment of their debts
Out of trio employ's property. By order of court, after the
bill was filed, • aortae was appointed with consent of
the co:nosey, and it was ars:ranged between them gad the
plaintiffs that, although the receiver was to take pommies of
the carriages and otter effects of the company, the boalarre
mu to go os se usual for the benefit of all parties. A
mditor .11 differed trots the plaintiffs, and was not
a party to the snit. brought ea action at law, to which
the compesy confeseed 'miscast, having so defence
Witco. Execution Wee maid so that jnilmest, and
the Sheriff of Norfolk, by virtue thereof. seared on tho car.
sieges sad property of the dielandants. The plaintiff to this
nit that applied for sa ietjanctim to restrain the ex. notion,
sad also. for an order to commit tho sheriff for contempt
of ewers, in siring property already in possession of the
meiver, the tScer of the court. Th. Via Chsnaillor of
Zsglani refused to mai be orders unless No plaintiffs or
BM, parties to the suit brought into court the, moans of
YO execution creditor's debt, winch being reload, his
arms: diseased the application with MU. This was the
&ciao, sow appealed from.
Sir F. Rally was heard in Bothell of the appeal 'Rodin
up to rear 2 o'clock, when Mr.ollowed on the
owe side, bat had not proceeded far whoa the court rose.

Barons V imessocasubs /MOUT inns.
RI ROYAL B• 1111 Or AtIeTVALIA.—COCEJIC/1111 CA/R.
—Wtantso. Ur Arra.
Mr. Rieman and Mr. Golriamid moved by way of appeal
from the decision of the Muter that the Dun of the appal.
last atirkt be removed from the list of eearribatories to the
above compeny. The appellant was in 1842 a director of the
company, but in Mal is that par be tenoned hie resigna-
tion, which was accepted. He then applied to the directive
to take back 100 shares which ha had taken is hit character
of director, which they steendlegly did, caacelting the snare',
and returairg him his rowimoty nom for 1,0001, wh oh be
had given an paymeat of a all is respect of his
shares. The vaiiility el this transaction under the
powen of tho csospanyo deed of settlement was the
question in dispute, the Matta having decided that the
appellent had not been relieved by it from his liability.
The d clause of that ias'rusesat empowered the directors
to purchase abuse which might be dined for sale, at such
prima as they might osemider reasonable. Other clauses
prescribed ciornin tonsalities I.t Om. :f treaties of shares
They cited " Be tike4.6 Silit" (3 De Oex and Bstale, 173;
2 Macosghren and Gordon. 197).
Mr. Moline and M. Daniel, fee the official meager,
opposed the motion, and mounded that the cancellation
could not be coi.sidered as a purchase within the 62nd
dam:, especially in the cane of a director, and that that
provision was nut intended to enable the direct irs them-
selves to escape from their own liabilities. They cited
" Morgues ease," (1 Hail and Twills, 320); and " Cul.
S:anhopo's else," (14 Janet).
Thu Vice-Chaacellot said, that the 'beeline of all fraud
or udahr intention on the part of any of the parties to the
traussetion mint be assumed, and that the case wee this: a
director, the bolder of 100 shone, wished to relive trim the
direction, and at the s.me to relinquish entirely his coo-
sezion with the company, by charting of hie sheres—perting
with %bow, or having them taken oil his hands. But it did
not appear that there was any corrupt bargain, or indeed any
bargain at all. The resigned, n was not conditional on the
shone being taken, but was a separate act. Alter the cm '
plate end unconditional resignation of his office as director,
and sevtrarce fran th: compsny of the appellant, his pro-
pnal as to bia shuts was accepted by the direetore, of
whom he was not then one, they giving him back his
promissory mote. That traasacimt appeared within the
powers conferred on the dirictors by the deed, and
this circumstance distinguished the ease [rem that of
Col. Stanhope, which hed been referred to. It wee mid
bows,. r that the hues and ceremonies required by the deed
bed not been pursued. His lloqour thought this did sot
invalidate the trIVISSOIIOII as against the appellant, be not
tilling the characters both of vendor and parttime.. His
Honour acceded to the motion, but gave en costa.

RE MADRID AMU VALTNCIA RAILWAT COMPANY.—
eIIADWIVICS CASII VP ACTN.
Mr. Bacon sad Mr. Ulant moved by way of appeal to
di•ebarge so otiltr of the Muter ft oohing the appellant,
Mr. NV illum Chadwick, to pay the tam of 25.0001. as musty
in his bawls to which the above company was entitled.
IV. Selwyn, for the Metal meager, obj sled to the mo.
tion beiug heard, so the grosed that Mr. Chadwick ass in
costmept for dimbeyiug an order direction him to produce
books and documents in hie custody. sad cited " Herring o.
Cloberry " (12 Simons. 410) and other ewe.
Mr. limos and Mr. CMSue referred to " King v. Brunt"
(3 Milne and Cra'g. 191), " Wilton e. Batas" (Ibid, 197),
sad "Parker v. Merton," (14 Low loam 1, Chancery,
109), sad am:ended that the appellant night nevertheless be

The Vice Chanceller overruled the objection.
Mr. Bacon aid Mr. Olaste then proceeded with the
motive, ant said that the 25 0001 was ordered to be paid as
jrciski beta tho proctedi of a cheque drawn by Mr. Chit.
wick, ea a shrectue, on Zara Masterman, but it ro such
cheeps+ had been produced in evidence, nor kid ite 11.wenee
been 113 110t0IIRt•a fur as to enthorla• the admission of
escordery evidence.
Mr. &lyre, for the official manager, was not cared epos.
The Vice Chancellor istd that if the eaistenee nod con.
tents of the cheque had been regularly proved, there would
be nothing to Mew, shame. It was not, however. athessary
to enter into the townie* whether the thistesee and thatents,
of the cheque but been regularly proved. Assuasive the =-
Wince of a cheque not to have been peeved, or assume- g
its eautenee to be proved, and its eontsele net to have tees
roved, the rosterial feet still remained, as it seemed to him,
inlet clearly proved, namely, that a sum of 23,0001,, part of
the money of this cempary, found its way from the bankers
of the company Co the beakers of Mr. Trye, a stockbroker;
that he (Mr. frye) was eke agent of Mr. Chadwick, or had
dealings with him; and that, la some satentr.
sum of 2.5,0001. (which, in his Honour's judgment,
was ?lately identified with the 26,000!. already men-
it. set) found its way into Mr. ClidWillk.o haRRL Mr.
C.:Alkaloid' had not amounted for these diremotances;
he had cicala eat:planation to "that the violent presumption
thus lamed against his. Asti. saarecntr, he wee in contempt
for nos-produrtion of papers mid &enemata
Ilia Honour Ireland the motive with theta.
Mr. Bacon sal Mr. Oldies then moved, by way of sprat
on the part of the same appellant, to discharge another order
of the Master, whereby he charged the appellant and the
other directors with • sum of 106,0001. as Wire due from
then to the company. They contended that, inasmuch as
the entry y tee otticial stansger in his books of each a debit
was, by the !Medic, up Act, prime facie evidence against
them, tad would throw upon them the burden of disprovieg
it, it ought not to have been made in the absence of the
parties charged or without giving them an opportunity of
snafu their ease.
Mr. Sidey•, for the cMciil manager, opposed the motion.
and contended that it was never the practise for the eflitial
manager, In mating up his statement from the books and
papers of the oompany, to be attended by any of the parties.
mads use the beat and fairest statement that be could,
aid then the parties bad the opportunity of showing before
the Master if they could that It was in any respect inaccu-
rate. Any other coons would render the proceedings ender
the let quite Impracticable.
The Vice-Ccancellor said that the book of the offitisl
manager mast have its origin tube. quietly to the order for
wielding up the company. The act nevertheless made It
prima facie evidence. The entry was made, it seemed,
without tearicg the party debited, without consulting him,
without serving him with thy notice. The master bad taken
• course which was consistent with natural justice, and had
said abut practically the official manager's book should be
treated as if it were not prima facie evidence, that
was that the mareger should begin. It was im-
possible not to approve of that course of he might
esprit' en opinion upon it), subject to the question
whether it was conestent with the terms of the Wind-
ing-up Acts, which of course must be obeyed. Those
acts had, however, made it prima facie evidence, and it
was impassible to dispense with their provisions. But if an
entry in the cHclal manager's book was to be prima facie
evidence, inch an entry ought not to be made without
hearing the person against whom it was made, without eon-
eultina him, without serving him or giving him notice that
it was made. His Honour, therefore, felt himself obliged
to accede in aubstanee to the motion without giving any
opinion as to what ought to be done in say other see. Tke
applicant had not served notice of the motion on the other
parties associated with him in the debit, and he thought the
best and meat thonoisieel course would be to ditchers/e cm
canal the entry so far as it related to the debit of 106,0001.

Ism Vlcseumsszol IRcars.
Is Ti, MATINS OP TAB JOINT BTOCIL COMPUTING'
WINDMIII VP ACTS, AND IS Tat MATTAZ Olt TIN ROYAL
INDIA AND AUSTRALIA MAIL CTIAIRPACZJIT CONPAAT.
—Br PAR= MANDALAY: . . . .

The Viee•CheneelLr delivered hie judgment epos this
notion, the object of with* wee to hove the muses of Mom
Nasdaq sad Co. withdraws from the Moot centtibs-
Wiwi ea shish they had bees pissed by the.
aie gesso sell that the pease= et the ashemetted, is
Asp" erlildsmis mil sheets its the isameist si