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

LAW INTELLIGENCE—(This Day.)

__~

COURT OF CHANCERY.
(Before Vice-Unancellor. Kindersiey.)
THE ARIGNA MINES.-GARNER V. 110011 E.

This Ca'G came before the court upon the petition of
the plaintiff, one of th z.ilareholders in the Arigna
a‘lloeP, praying thst a suflisient sum might be paid out
of the funds in c dirt to satisfy-, a .distress for rent, .which
had been put into the
.Arigna Mines in .Ireland, and
under which the, whole phmt and property of the
company bad been seized- - execution.. It ap,
peared that the distress had been put. In before
the lives on which the lease bad been granted of
the mines had dropped, and proceedings were now
being taken under the Fee Farm Conversion Act
for procuring a perpetual lease at a fee farm rent in-
stead of a lease for lives renewable f.r ever. The sum
of 5,0001. was now in court to the credit of the cause,
and if an order was not made by which a sum would be
applicable fur the payment of the rout, the machinery
and stock would be sold, and the whole property of the
company destroyed.
The Vice• Chancellor inquired if there was any affida-
vit that the rent was actually due, and who were the
defendants scow that Dr. Moore was dead ?
Mr. Sheblatar,'Who appeared for the petitioner, said
that the accounts showed that the rent was due, and
that, in point of fact, there was no defendaut. Dr.
Moore, by his will, left the whole of his property to his
only daughtei, a married lady, but the estate was so
embarrassed that she had declined to take out adminis-
tration.

The court made the order for the payment, out of
court, of the gum required, upon an affidavit being pro-
duced to the Registrar that the rent was due.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCFI.
(Sittings at Guildhall, before Lord Campbell.)
GADSDEN V. GOODLIFVE.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a corn
merchant, of Mark-lane, to recover damages from the
defendant, a shipping agent in the city, for a breach of
a charter party.
By consent of the parties, the cause was tried by
his lordship without the assistance of a jury.
The case was of no interest but to the parties con-
cerned.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
(Sittings at Guildhall, before Lord Cuief Baron Pollock
and a Special Jury.)
WYLD V. INGRAM.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff, the emi-
nent map publisher of the Strand and Charing-cross,
to recover damages of the defendant, the proprietor and
publisher of the Illustrated London News, for pirating
five maps of the "environs of Sebastopol."
Mr. James, Q.C., Mr. Bovill, Q.C., and Mr. Haw-
kins were for the plaintiff, and Sir F. Thesiger and Mr.
Ruse for the defendant.
Mr. James, in opening the case, said be should have
no difficulty in proving his case, because the defendant
had copied the inaccuracies, in execution, existing in the
plaintiff's map?, and called "Mr. Wyld to depose to these
facts, who had provided a number of copies of the maps
in question, crossed with line' and numbered for the as-
sistance of his lordship and the jury in detecting the
defects and prove the authorship of the publication.
His lordship suggested the referring this case, it being
one requiring great care in examination and measure-
ment of the various angles, &c., laid down.
Sir F. Thesiger assented.
Mr. Wyld said be wishes the defendant had suggested
it instead of driving him to trial. He had no other
object in view than seeming his property from piracy.
Sir F. Thesiger said he was sorry the defendant had
been compelled to drive him to trial.
Mr. Wyld said that was not so. A tradesman who
considered himself ill-used, as he was prepared to prove
he had been by the defendant, had no alternative but to
come into this court.

Several names were mentioned to whom the case
should be referred, but they were objected to by the
plaintiff, on the ground that they were competitors in
trade. He should have no objection to refer it to a
gentleman possessing the requisite knowledge he knew
his lordihip had on the subject, or for his lordship to
try it without a jury.
It was ultimately referred to Mr. Webster, a barrister,
combining, as the learned counsel stated, law, skill, and
mechanical and other knowledge requisite to fully and
fairly decide the question.
A. verdict was taken for the plaintiff, subject to the
above reference.

MARKS AND Walt V. THE LONDON, BRIGHTON, AND SOUTH

COAST RAILWAY.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff against
the Directors of the above company, for that they by
their servants did assault and beat the plaintiff's wife,
by throwing her with force and violence to the ground,
&c. The defendants pleaded first, not guilty ; and
secondly, that the plaintiff's wife had entered a first
class carriage without leave. That she was requested
to leave the carriage by the company's servants which
she refused to do, and that the assault complained of was
committed in consequence.
Mr. Sergeant Wilkins and Mr. Hawkins were counsel
for the plaintiffs ; Mr. M. Chambers, Q.O , and Mr.
Spinks for the defendants.

It appeared from the opening of the learned serjeant
that the plaintiff was a furniture broker, residing at No.
2, Vine-place, Bishopegate-street, and the present action
was brought to recover compensation for the damage
and injury sustained by his wile. A Jewish charitable
society, called the Widow's House, bad issued tickets
for an excursion to the Crystal Palace and back on the
21st of last August, and the plaintiff had purchased
four of the tickets issued by the society, with which
his wife and three daughters went to the railway
4ation at London-bridge, where the tickets were
exchanged for the company's return tickets to the Crys-
tal Palace, and afterwards marked by one of the com-
pany's servants. She walked on to the platform, and
after waiting a few moments the train came up, the doors
of all the carriages were opened, and the public were di-
rected to take their places. The phaintiff's wife and his
three daughters got into a first-class carriage, and pro-
ceeded to the Crystal Palace. The tickets included re-
freshments at Annerley, and, after viewing the Palace,
the plaintiff's wife and her three daughters walked there,
and proceeded to the, station at nine o'clock, awaiting
the return of the train. Upon the train corning
up the doors of the carriages were again opened,
and she and her daughters got into a first-class cerriage.
Shortly after, a female with a "cryin g boy " got into
the carriage, which was full, when a gentleman feeling
annoyed called to one of the company's servants, who
ordered them out, and then asked to see Mrs. Marks'
tickets. They were shown, and found to be third-class
tickets, on which the servant ordered them out of the
carriage, and caught hold of her by the dress, and in
getting out she fell between the wheels of the carriage
and the platform, whereby she was so much injured
that she was confined to her house for twelve
days. In the scuffle, her parasol was broken.
Application was afterwards made by letter to the secre-
tary of the company for compensation, who declined
granting it on the ground that the company's servants
had informed him that Mrs. Marks and six friends were
travelling in a first-class carriage with third-class tickets,
and that being requested to leave the carriage, Mrs.
Marks slipped her foot and fell.
The Lord Chief Baron said the present action could
not be sustained against the company, who were not
answerable for any improper conduct committed by their
servants, but the party so misconducting himself. The
law with reference to a sheriff's officer (which was an
anomaly in the law of England) did not apply here. To
make the company liable they must show that specific
directions were given by the company to their servant to
act as he had done in this case.
It was ultimately arranged that a verdict should be
returned for the plaintiff fur 20/, subject to the decision
of the court above. The second plea being withdrawn,
verdict accordingly.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—(This Day.)