The Sun.
London, England, 1855-06-05 00:00:00

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

Sittings in Banco.—Before the Lord Chief Baron, and
Barons Alderson, Platt, and Martin.)

JOHNSON AND OTHERS V. SHREWSBURY AND BIRMINGHAM
RAILWAY COMPANY.

Mr. Raymond appeared to show cause against a rule
obtained by the plaintiffs for a' review of the Master's
taxation of costs, in the matter of an arbitration between
the parties. It appeared that the action was for a breach
of contract entered into between the plaintiffs, who are
contractors with the defendants, for the working of their
line for the term of seven years, but which was broken
off before the expiration of that period in consequence,
as was alleged by the defendant, that the plaintiffs had
worked the line improperly. The learned counsel sub-
mitted that there was nothing in this case to distinguish
it from many others of a similar kind, and there was
nothing to take it out of the general rule and practice.
Baron Martin observed that surely the Master must
be the best judge of the taxation of the costs in question.
The Chief Baron said that the reason why the rule
had been granted in the first instance was because the
Master thought the Court might fortify the opinion that
all the Masters seemed to entertain, that two counsel
ought not to be allowed in an arbitration case, which
was one of the questions arising in this case.
Baron Alderson also observed that the Masters were
guided by general practice and discretion, and if they
were not trusted to the Court would have to tax the
costs in every matter.
Mr. Raymond having been further heard,
Mr. Phipson argued at some length in favour of the
rule.
The Court finally decided that the rule must be made
absolute in the matter of reviewing the taxation of part
of the costs, and that the question of counsel must be
left to the consideration of the Master.

BANKRUPTCY COURT.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Fonblanlue.)
The power of the Court to grant execution for costs.

IN RE BERESFORD.
This bankrupt was described as of Portugal-street,
Lincoln's-inn-fields, cabinetmaker, and to-day was ap-
pointed for his last examination.
Mr. Luca 3 opposed on behalf of the trade assignee,
who was the only creditor who had proved his debt,
but his Honour, after hearing Mr. Chidley, allowed the
bankrupt to pass, reserving all questions as to conduct
until the certificate meeting.
Mr. Lucas then applied for an immediate execution
to issue from this Court against a person named Davison,
for costs in a petition to dismiss the assignee for mis-
conduct. It appeared that Davison, who is a friend of
the bankrupt, sought to prove a debt and choose him-
self assignee, but from doubts his Honour would
not admit the proof, and the assignee was ap-
pointed, and as there were no assets he made
inquiries in the belief that property had been concealed.
Davison then petitioned the Court to dismiss the
assignee, but his Honour considered that the charge was
solely to get rid of the assignee, and dismissed the peti-
tion with costs. Davison to avoid this petitioned the
Insolvent Court, and the present object was to get an
immediate execution before he could obtain protection.
His Honour said it was a very unusual application,
but it would be granted.