The Sun.
London, England, 1839-11-19 00:00:00

:;XCELQUER COURT-THIS DAY.

(Sittings in Banco.)
SIIELDON V. M`MORINE.

Tie question in this case is the same as that which
was argued a few days ago in the case of " Hibblewhite
v. M'Morine." It related to the sale of fifty shares of
the Brighton Railway Company by the plaintiff to the
defendant, and the refusal of the latter to accept them.
The plaintiff sold them after the refusal to accept by the
defendant, and brought Ms action for the loss
consequent upon such re-sale. The verdict was
for the plaintiff. Rules for new trials were obtained
in each case, which were argued at great length a few
days ago, when it appeared in our columns ; but after
Mr. Cresswell had argued the case for the plaintiff, and
had left the Court, a new question was raised ; viz.,
whether the transfer of the shares offered to the de-

fondant, being in blank, were legal, and so made a
legal testier according to the contract. That question
now came on to be argued, and
Mr. CRESSWELL contended that the instrument of
transfer was not a deed. The Act of Parliament
merely required that the sale and transfer of all shares
should be made by a written document, which was af-
terwards to be stamped for the benefit of the Revenue ;
but there was no necessity for its being delivered as the
act and deed of the party. On the contrary the clerk
of the Company must make a memorandum of the tran-
saction in the books of the Company. He instanced the
case of writs and subpoenas, which were notoriously
sealed with the seal of the Court in blank—again it had
been held over and over again that bills of exchange
signed in blank might be filled up subsequently, and from
that time became a legal instrument ; so he contended
was the case here. The transfer was made from Prit-
chard to any one who might be nominated by the plain-
tiff. The Learned Gentleman cited many cases from
the books, in support of the arguments he addressed to
the Court.

Mr. COWLING having followed on the same side,
Mr. ALEXANDER, contra, contended, that upon look-
ing at the Act of Parliament, on looking at and read-
ing the 156th section of that Act, could any one for a
moment doubt but the Legislature intended that all
transfers of shares must be made by deed. It was so
clear, that he would not take up the time of the Court by
attempting to answer that for which there was no founda-
tion. He would merely call the attention of their Lordships
to the fact that, in all cases of filling up blanks in
deeds or bills of exchange, cited by his Learned Friend,
they were under peculiar circumstances—either the
filling-up took place in the presence of parties, or
something was knowingly left to be done ; in the case
before the Court the transaction between the parties
was complete, there was nothing more to be done.
Pritchard parted with his shares ; he could only do so
according to the provisions of the Act, which formed. the
Ccmpany, and regulated its proceedings by
a deed ; he did so by a deed, but it was dooe in
blank, and therefore was invalid. Such being
the state of facts, it was clear the plaintiff
had not made a legal tender of the shares, and therefore
the rule ought to be made absolute.
Mr. TO➢ILINSON followed shortly on the same side.
The COURT said the whole case was a very important
one, and they would take time to consider it.

EXCHEQUER, CHAMBER.

(THIS DAY).

:N RE MANCHESTER AND LEEDS RAILWAY COMPANY.

PETITION OF WHEELWRIGHT AND OTHERS.

Mr. WILBRAHAM said the petitioners in this case
were the trustees of a charity, and they prayed that the
sum of 951. agreed on for a portion of land taken by
the Company, and 351. as compensation for damage,
might be invested in the Accouutant-general, and the
interest thereof paid to the trustees of the charity from
time to time.
Lord ABINGER—They are not trustees ex-officio,
but personal ?
Mr. WILBRAHAM—OnIy personal.
Lord ABINGER—Then I can only order it to be paid
to them, and not to any future trustees.
Mr. BACON, who appeared for the Company, did not
object, provided the order was made without prejudice
to their right to call for a conveyance if they should be
advised to do so.

The order was granted for payment to the present
petitioners only.

IN RE EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY COMPANY.--PE'
TITION OF THE LORD MAYOR, ETC., OF LONDON.

This was a petition from the Corporation of London,
praying that the sum of 5001., paid by the Eastern
Counties Railway Company, for certain land taken by
them for the purposes of the Railway might be invested
in the purchase of Three per Cent. Consolidated An-
nuities, and that the dividend might be paid to the
petitioners.
His LORDSHIP granted the application.