The Sun.
London, England, 1855-01-20 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—Jan. 19.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

THE CHARING•CROSS BRIDGE COMPANY V. MITCHELL.

In this case an action was brought against the defen-
dant, who is a collector of the land-tax, for an illegal ,
distress. This action was turned into a special case by
consent, in order to raise the question for the opinion of
this Court whether the Charing-cross Bridge Company
is liable to be assessed to the land-tax in respect of the
tolls taken at the bridge on the Hungerford-market side.
It appeared by the case that the Hungerford-market
Company had redeemed the land-tax formerlypayable in
respect of the land en which the bridge is built on the
Hungerford side ; and it was therefore contended for
the plaintiffs that as the land-tax had been so redeemed,
the tolls raised from the bridge subsequently built on
the land were not assessable to the laud-tax. For the
defendant it was contended that the tolls in question
did not arise out of the land, but were a separate tene-
ment within the words of the Land-tax Assessment Act,
aid were rateable as such, and this it was contended
had been decided by the Court of Exchequer in the case
of the Vauxhall-bridge, where the assessment had been
simply of the tolls, without any reference to the land.
Mr. Bramwell, Q.C., with whom was Mr. Matthews,
appeared for the plaintiffs ; Sir F. Thesiger, with whom
was Mr. Needham, for the defendants.
Lord Campbell said that it seemed to him that the
else of the Vauxhall bridge decided the present. In
that case the tolls had been held to be assessable, on the
ground that a toll, per se, forms an entirely different
tenement, separate from the laud ; it is a new property,
created of non-Parliamentary hereditament. It is said
that in the Vauxhall case the land-tax payable on the
land was not redeemed, and that, therefore, that case is
different from the present, but I think that, does not
make any difference whatever. The assessment is in
respect of the new tenement, the tolls, and not in respect
of the land ; our judgment must, therefore, be for the
defendant.

Judgment for defendant.
THE QUEEN V. W. T. CHAPLIN ESQ., CHAIRMAN OF THE
SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY--E$ PARTE SNELL. I
Sir F. Thesiger moved fir a rule calling en Mr. Chap-
lin, the Chairman of the South-Western Railway Com-
pany, to show cause why a mandamus should not issue,
commanding him to ascertain and declare the state of
the poll on a certain election of a director of the South-
Western Railway Company, at a meeting of the com-
pany on the 10th of August last.
It appeared by the affidavits on which the rule was
moved, that for some time past a great question had
arisen amongst the shareholders of the company relative
to an intention on the part of the directors to increase
the capital of the company, with a view to extending
their line of railway. This question had been much did-
cussed, and much opposition raised to the scheme. One
of the mist active opponents to the proposed increase
was Mr. Snell, the applicant for the present rule ; and
it appeared that, some time since, Sir Win. Heathcote,
ono of the directors of the company, signifying his inten-
tion of retiring from the direction, Mr. Snell was soli-
cited to become a candidate for that office in his
place. Mr. Snell acceeded to the request, and pro-
ceeded to canvass the shareholders for their votes,
and accordingly issued a number of circulars to them,
each of which contained a letter, which was to be
returned to Mr. Snell if the shareholder intended
to support him, the letter so enclosed being an
authority to Mr. Snell to issue a proxy, and send to
the shareholder for his signature, who was then to
return it to Mr. Snell, there being a power in the
company's act for the shareholders to vete by proxy.
1,345 of these letters were returned to Mr. Snell in time
fer him to send the proxies and obtain theta back in
time to lodge them with the secretary seven days before
the day of election, as is required in order to authorise
the person holding such proxy to vote for the shareholder
sending it ; but it appeared that thirteen letters were
sent to Mr. Snell too late for him to send the proxies
for signature to the respective shareholders, whereupon
he wrote to those persons, telling them that as he con-
ceived they had given him authority to issue a proxy for
them, he had done so, and had had it signed for them
by his secretary and lodged with the rest, but that he
should not use them until he received their authority for
doing so and recognising his act, and also that he should
inform the other side what he had done. In every case
he received an answer recognising his act and giving hint
the authority he required. The election of the director
to fill the vacancy created by Sir W. Hea,tlacote's retire-
.

ment came on at the general half-yearly meeting on tho
10th of August last, the only other candidate being Mr.
Willcox, M.P. for SouthamPton, who was supported
by Mr. Chaplin, the chairman of the company. The
show of hands was in favour of Mr. Snell, upon which
a poll was demanded on the part of Mr. Willcox, which
was fixed for tho next day, the 11th. Mr. Snail gave
notice that he should vote on his proxies on that day,
but first wrote to Mr. Willcox, stating that he should
make his declaration of having duly lodged his proxies
Anil intention to vote on all but the thirteen, as to
which there night be some doubt of whether he had
the strict right to vote, and he therefore stated the cir-
cumstances in respect of them, saying he did not intend
to vote on them unless the scrutineers held them to be

admissible. Mr. Snell did not receive any answer to
this letter on the 11th, so he told the scrutineers he
should not use them, and accordingly withdrew them.
On the 12th Mr. Snell r eceived a letter from Mr. 'Will-
cox, saying that he had been in the country, and so did
not get his letter in time to answer it by the 11th, or
he should have been most happy to meet his wishes in
any way in respect to the proxies. The result of the
poll on the 11th was to place Mr. Snell in a majority
of 651 votee and 3,979 proxies over Mr. Willcox. The
scrutineers gave in a statement to the adjourned meet-
ing to the effect that Mr. Such had stated that he had
authority to use some proxies which were not strictly
signed in tima, and that they could not say which were
tainted proxies and which were not, and that they be-
lieved there were others tainted beyond the thirteen re-
ferred to by him. Upon this an inquiry was appointed
to be held before the scrutineers into the validity of the
votes, and counsel attended on both sides. This meet-
ing was held on the 29th of September, when Mr. Will-
cox's counsel took objections to 462 of Mr. Snell's
proxies. The effect of striking these off would only have
been to reduce Mr. Snell's majority on the proxies to
3,652. Therefore, to save time, Mr. Snell proposed to
the scrutineers to give up these voteQ, upon which Mr.
Willcox's counsel withdrew from further prosecuting
the inquiry. The meeting was then adjourned to the
3d of October, when nothing was required to be done
but to declare the state of the poll and the election of
Mr. Snell, for by no means could his majority be re-
duced so as to place Mr. Willcox a-head. Oa the 3d of
October, however, the chairman declined to do this, but
again adjourned the meeting, and on the 16th he wrote
to Mr. Snell, asking him if he intended doing anything
to relieve his mind from the state of doubt it was in from
the points which had been raised as to the validity of
some of his votes. Mr. Snell replied to this letter,
stating that he had nothing further to do in the matter
but to call on Mr. Chaplin, as chairman of the com-
pany to declare the state of the poll. Upon this Mr.
Chaplin again wrote to him, stating that, as he had de-
clined giving him any further explanation, he should
decline to declare the state of the poll. On the 17th of
November another meeting was held, when a great
discussion took place as to the competency of Mr.
Snell to fill the office of director, as it was alleged he
had acted improperly in regard to the 13 proxies. In
reply to this it was contended that Mr. Snell had done
everything openly, and that, if there had been any mis-
take in the matter, there was no impropriety of conduct;
and, further, that he was quite ready to leave his con-
duct in the hands of Lord Chandos, or any other unin-
fluenced person, and abide by whatever decision he
should come to. Lord Chandos was accordingly ap-
plied to, to give his opinion on the matter, but he de-
clisted to interfere. Two subsequent meetings were hold
en the 14th and 15th of December last, on both which
applications were made to Mr. Chaplin, as chairman of
the company, to declare the poll ; this, however, he
refused to do, although he was informed that, if he re-
fused, legal proceedings would be taken to compel him
to do so.
Lord Campbell—How is the obligation to declare the
state of the poll cast on Mr. Chaplin !
Sir F. Thesiger—Under the 94th section of the com-
pany's act.
Lord Campbell—You have stated sufficient to entitle
you to a rule.—Rule nisi granted.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY,
IN RE BOLENO.

This vas the certificate meeting in the case of Henry
Boleno Maim, the Drury-lane clown, who kept the
Clown Tavern, Windmill-street.

Mr. Beard, for the assignee's offered no opposition.
Mr. Chidley, on behalf of the bankrupt, asked for a
first-class certificate.
Mr. Niel olson, the official assignee, reported that the
bankrupt had a surplus, ine -w
Nedoveilml
of the Clownber,lBs3, ofT4avle4rl.n;
he had paid. 5001. for the good-will
which had burned out an entire loss. He now owed
1,215/. ; th u assets were expected to yield about 103. in
bute h o f e
classh djui
the pound.
4i3Honottr said the question in this case was only
onto a considerai The bankrupt might have his certificate,
Jeed amountr a t quicklyherefd eb
t. H
from e a surplusmightb e oaf 4001.ye17.
excellent clog; 1, but he had acted very foolishly in throw-
ing away his money in a house when ho might as well
have thrown it- into the gutter.
The bankrupt stated, in answer to questions from the
court, that he had saved nearly 6001. in Liverpool. ;fie
thought of going to France, having an engagement
there ; but wh en in London he was induced, by repre-
sentations as t o the excellent character of the
um, to
take the Clowi t Tavern, then called the Catherine Wheel.
'He consulted taveral of his friends, including the trade
assignee, who : 111 thought the house a good one. He
spent a good de 11 in fitting up the heuse, but it had not
turned out equ 0.1 to his expectations.
His Honour -ddeired his judgment till the assignees
had disposed A tlie house occupied by the Lankrupt.