The Sun.
London, England, 1855-01-12 00:00:00

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. BRIGGS.
This was a motion for an injunction to restrain the
defendant from proceeding with a building which he
was erecting under the following circumstances :—The
Birmingham and Oxford Railway, where it passes
through the town of Birmingham, is in part arched
over, and the company had put up for sale by auc-
tion a portion of the surface where the' line was
thus arched ever, The defendant became the pur-
chaser ; the conditions of sale provided that no build-
ing should be erected on the arch unless and until
the plans for such building had been approved by the
engineer of the company. Accordingly the defendant
submitted to Mr. Hewitt, the resident engineer, the
plans of his proposed building ; these were returned to
him approved, and he had proceeded to a great extent
before the conveyance was executed. The conveyance
contained a covenant by the defendant not to proceed
with any new building until the plans of such building
were approved by the engineers of the company, but the
conveyance had no reference to the buildings then erect-
ing. Shortly after the execution of the conveyance Mr.
Brunnell became alarmed at the building which was
going on, and considered that it might endanger the
safety of the arched covering of the railway ; and in con-
sequence he applied to the resident solicitor of the com-
pany to interfere. The latter applied to the defendant,
who refused to stay his proceedings. The solicitor then
endeavoured to induce the magistrates to interfere,
who at first refused, but ultimately an arrangement was
made under their advice, by which Mr. Briggs was to
be allowed to proceed with one man only, so as to keep
up hie right. The Mayor of Birmingham then applied to
the Board of Trade to send down an officer to inspect
the works. This officer reported that there was no sign
of any immediate risk, but that the arch must be
strengthened before any greater weight was put upon
it. Terms had been proposed to the defendant by the
company, and the defendant had offered to resell the
land to the company at the price given for it with com-
pensation amounting in the whole to 8.0001., with an
indemnity against any claims which might be brought
against him by the tenants to whom he had leased the
premises, or he had offered to accept compensation for
his lose, and that the company should do all that was ne.
cessary to enable him to complete his building. These
. terms were rejected, others were offered by the company,
and in the end the present information was filed at
the relation of the company, and an injunction moved
for to restrain the defendant from proceeding with the
building. The defendant had given an undertaking in
the terms of the notice of motion ; and then another in•
formation was filed, as was contended, really by the de-
fendant, and a motion was made to restrain the company
from running their trains over the line until the arch-
way was made safe ; the object, as was alleged, being,
that the stopping of the trains would be so serious an
evil to the company, that they would be glad to accede
to the defendants terms of purchasing the land.
Mr..Rolt and Mr. G. L. Russell appeared for the cone-
pany; Mr. James and Mr. Speed for the defendantßriggs.
But after much discussion terms were arranged, and it
was ordered by consent that until the hearing of the
cause or further order, the defendant should not pro-
ceed with his building without the consent of Mr. Brun-
nell, that the company should be at liberty to enter upon
the defendant's land for the purpose of doing such works
as might be necessary to strengthen the foundation, so
as to enable the defendant to complete the building ac-
cording to the original plan ; the company submitting
to be bound by any order the court might make at the
hearing as to the compensation to which the defendant
might be entitled for any damage or loss occasioned by
the proceedings of the company, with liberty to all par-
ties to apply, and the order to be without prejudice to
any question in the cause.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
This being the first day of Hilary Term, Lord
Campbell, Mr. Justice Coleridge, Mr. Justice Wight-
man, and Mr. Justice Crompton, having partaken
of breakfast at the Lord Chancellor's, came down
in procession with the other learned judges to West-
Minster Hall, and took their seats on the bench at
two o'clock.
THE QUEEN (EX. PARTE Till JUSTICES OF MAIDENHEAD) V.
PDARCB AND OTHERS.—ALLEGED LIBEL.
Mr. Whately moved for a rule, calling on the de-
fendants, three of the town councillors of the borough of
Maidenhead, to show cause why a criminal informa-
tion should not be filed against them for a libel, lin-
pitting that three magistrates of the borough had been
guilty of improper conduct as magistrates. It appeared.
that a gentleman named Richard Lovegrove, being in
arrear as to certain payments alleged to be due to the
Board of Health, was summoned' before the ma-
gistrates on the 24th of October, 1854, when both par-
ties were represented by counsel. The magistrates,
after a full hearing, made an order of payment against
Mr. Lovegrove, who paid the sum due with costs. They,
however, refused to allow the fees of the counsel of the
Local Board of Health, amounting to from 251. to 351.,
as they were informed by their clerk that it was not
the practice to do so. On the 7th December, the three
gentlemen against whom he moved issued a hand-bill, of
which the magistrates complained as libellous, in the
form of an address to the burgesses of Maidenhead.
The learned counsel then lead the alleged libel, which
stated that the magistrates had refused to allow the coun-
sel's fees, "being overawed by the impetuosity of their
clerk, or too pusillanimous to face the frown of Mr.
Lovegrove."
Lord Campbell asked if the learned counsel had read
the whole of the libel !
Mr. Whately replied in the affirmative.
Lord Campbell—Then I don't find any corruption im-
puted.
Mr. Whately—The magistrates were charged with
failing to do their duty in consequence of intimidation.
Lord Campbell—The judgments of the judges of the
courts of law in this country are open to comrueat, and
are commented on, without violation of the law, and
for anything I know to the benefit of the public. We
don't see why the magistrates of Maidenhead are to be
exempted from that to which the judges of the land are
liable. (Laughter.)
Mr. Whately—You see, my lord, it is imputed that
the magistrates Lad not done their duty, as they were
overawed by the impetuosity of their clerk, or were too
pusillanimous to face the frown of Mr. Lovegrove.
Lord Campbell—No doubt these magistrates are
highly honourable men, but I think they are rather
thin skinned. We most anxiously protect magistrates
in the discharge of their duty, and if any specific
offence had been charged we most certainly should have
called on the /
f rrinef the charge either to re-
tract or substantiateiarty z
i) eet:There is not ono member of
this court who thinks that t.shtirsatiess L
should interfere. These magi :niear very which
htrust
to their character without putting the criminal law into
effect.
Mr. Whateley was sure that this expression of
fheis
lordship would be highly sati:-E:ctory to the g
fir whom he appeared, yand who had only taken_ this
course fur the purpose of showing that they bad not
failed in their duty.
The other learned judges having concurred,
The application Was refused. -

The suspension has been announced of Messrs. Keste-
ven, Brothers, an old and well•known firm in the woollen
trade. Their liabilities amount to 40,000/., and their
assets are estimated to yield only 7s. in the pound.
A little boy named Kyran M'Keon, residing with his
parents at ilonagher, fell into a boiler of hot water on
Sunday last, and was scalded to death. At Thoinas-
toun, on Monday, a child, four years of age, was acci-
dentally burnt to death during the absence of its
parents.