The Sun.
London, England, 1853-01-28 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE.-(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF CHANCERY,

(Before the Lord Chancellor and the Lords Justices.)

DERBYSHIRE V. HOLME.

Their Lordships proceeded this morning with this part-
heard appeal, which would probably occupy them the
entire day.

(Before the Master of the Rolls.)
SWINBURN V. NELSON.

His Honour this morning delivered judgment in this
case, which came before him on exceptions to the Mas-
ter's report. Both parties are manufacturers of isinglass,
and the plaintiff conceiving that the defendant had in-
fringed a patent of which he was the holder, filed a bill
to compel him to discover his transactions with respect
to it. The defendant contended that he had no right to
answer the interrogatories contained in the bill, and
denied the right of the plaintiff. The question was,
whether this was a sufficient answer to the plaintiff's
bill. The defendant relied upon the case of Adams v.
Fisher, in which Lord Cottenham laid it down that the
right of a plaintiff to inspect books and documents
rested upon the validity of his title, and upon its being
undisputed. Upon this his Honour said, a question arose
whether this rule, if sound, applied in the same manner
to the answering of interrogatories as to the production
of books and documents. Ho was of opinion that it
would apply, and both cases must bo treated in exact),
the same manner. With respect to the Main question,
he had consulted all the cases and books bearing upon
the subject, and ho was of opinion that the weight of
authority before the case of Adam v. Fisher was to the
effect that a defendant who answered a bill, must answer
it fully, that he could not answer one part and then re-
fuse to answer the rest. He himself inclined to this
opinion, and it was of great importance to the preserva-
tion of the rules of pleadings in equity that this rule
should be maintained. In the present state of authori-
ties, however, the exceptions must be dismissed without
costs.
Decree accordingly.

QUEEN'S BENCH.
(Sittings in Banco.)

THE QUEEN V. THE ARCHIPELAGO COMPANY.-JUDGMENT.
This was a proceeding under a scire facias, at the in-
stance of Sir J. Brooke, for the purpose of rendering
the royal charter incorporating the Archipelago Com-
pany void, on the ground that the conditions it contained
had not been complied with. At the trial a verdict
passed for the Crown, and a rule to arrest judgment was
subsequently obtained, and argued at considerable length.
The Court, having taken time to deliberate, now gave
judgment ; but as there was a difference of opinion
among the learned judges, each delivered his opinion
separately.

Mr. Justice Erie said it was contended on the part of
the prosecutor that the letters patent granted to the
defendants had become void, because, as had been proved
by the verdict of the jury, they had failed to comply
with the condition prescribed by the Crown—that
50,000/., being half of the capital of the company,
should be paid up before it should begin business ; and
it was also contended that the charter became void in
consequence of such non-compliance, notwithstanding
the Crown had failed to exercise the right which it had
reserved to itself of annulling or revoking the charter
by writing under the great seal, or sign manual, when
any of the conditions were found to be unfulfilled. This
construction seemed to him untenable, as it was unsup-
ported by authority, and against the principle generally
recagnised in such cases. The will of the Crown as to
the revocation of the charter could not be sufficiently
expressed, except in the manner specified in that instru-
ment, and as it had not been rendered void by any writ-
ing under the great seal, or royal sign manual, he thought
the rule in arrest of judgment should be made absolute.
Mr. Justice Wightman entertained a different opi-
nion, and was in favour of the rule being discharged.
Mr. Justice Coleridge agreed with Mr. Justice Erle—
that the rule ought to be made absolute.
Lord Campbell considered that proceedings under a
wire facias could be properly instituted, although the
Crown had not formally revoked the charter in the man-
ner prescribed, and that the writ was not, on the face
of it, defective, because it did not contain an allegation
of such revocation. After a very attentive consideration
of the charter, he thought the provision as to revoking
it under the great seal, or sign manual, in no respects
limited the proceedings under scire facias, which other-
wise existed, and that such provision only gave an addi-
tional remedy to the Crown to revoke or modify the
charter in a summary manner. For these reasons he
was of opinion, with his brother Wightman, that judg-
ment should not be arrested ; but as the Court were
equally divided, the rule would drop, and judgment
would be for the Crown ; but he had the satisfaction to
think that the case could be taken by writ of error be-
fore a superior court, who had power, if they thought
fit, to arrest the judgment.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.

TATTERSALL'S—TuuRSDA.T.
METROPOLITAN HANDICAP.
10 to 1 agst Contentment.
30 to 1 agst Wedlock filly.
LIVERPOOL STEEPLECHASE.
10 to 1 agst Oscar (taken.)
12 to 1 agst Miss Mowbray (taken.)
CHESTER CUP.
20 to 1 agst Lady Evelyn.
30 to 1 agst Constantine (taken).
33 to 1 agst Tremble.
40 to 1 agst Contentment.
DERBY.
11 to 1 agst West Australian (taken).
18 to 1 agst Sittingbourne taken).
1000 to 15 agst Contentment (taken).
1000 to 10 agst Mr. Sykes (taken).

LIVERPOOL SPI
WICDN
HANDICAP for t.

MEETING.
te SPRING Cur.

Yrs st lb
Weathergage 4 8 7
Cariboo 6 8 0
Warhawk 4 7 12
Cha,seaway
Warwick 6 7
Trosseau
Kiteflyer ........4 6 13
The Bishop 4 6 13
Bellewsto wn
Timid Fawn......., 5 6 11
Doubt .
Needle ..
Sister to Wanota 5 6 7
Earl of Warwick.. 6 6 6
Caliban.. ........... 6 6 6
Prestige......... 5 6 6
St. Michae1......... 4 6 6
Little Davie.. ...... 4 6 6
Caurire .............. a 6 5
Ringleader ......... 5 6 5
Victre55............. a 6 ' 4

Yrs st lb
Worcester 5 6 4
Richmond 4 6 4
Harp
Cheroot 4 6 2
Lalage 4 6 0
Happy Joe 4 6 0
Burndale 4 6 0
ch g by Harkaway,
out of Puss 4 5 10
Corybantes 3 5 9
IPloughboy 4 5 8
Goorkah 3 5 3
Pastrycook 3 5 3
Monsoon 3 5 0
Master Norton 3 4 10
Miss Emma 3 4 10
Moselle 3 4 10
Pride 3 4 10
Charity 3 4 10
Llanforda 3 4 7
__ _

Mickey Free 3 4 7

HANDICAP for the

Yrs st lb
Truth 5 8 10
Wea.thergage 4 8 8
Duc-an-Durras a 7 10
Warwick 6 7 10
Koh-i-Noor 4 7 10
Lady Agnes 4 7 8
Mrs. Birch 5 r 4
Belle wsto wn 5 7 1
Needle 4 7 0
May Day a 6 11
Caurire
Caliban 6 6 9
Worcester 5 6 9
Cheroot

AINTREE PLATE.
Yrs st lb
Burndale ... . 4 6 5
Lalage 4 6 3
True Girl 5 6 2
May Blossom 4 6 0
ch g by Harkaway,
out of Puss 4 5 12
Game Tommy 3 5 7
Gaffer Green
Pride 3 4 12
Llanforda 3 4 10
Mickey Frce 3 4 9
br f by Gameboy,
out of Maid of
Monton 3 4 7

HANDICAP for the GRAND
5 ft. if declared or

NATIONAL STEEPLECHASE,
or before Feb. 8.

st lb
Sir Peter Laurie 11 8
Warner 11 4
Vainhope 11 4
Knight of Gwynn° ll 2
Bourton ll 2
British Yeoman ll 2
Miss Mowbray 10 12
Lucy Neale lO 10
Peter Simple lO 10
Tipperary Boy 10 10
Ab-del-Kader 10 10
D uc-an• Durras lO 10
Melford 10 10
Montague ............ . lO 8
Fanny Elsler lO 8
Victress lO 6
Postilion lO 6
Maria Day lO 6
Augustine lO 6
Carrig . lO 5
Great Western ......... 10 5
Lamiame ............. 10 5
Half and-Half ..
....... 10 5
Laperelle ............... 10 5
Charlton ..
..10.... 5
Forest Lad lO 4
The Drag 10 4
The General 10 4
Wexford Tom 10 4 '
Field Marshal 10 4
Calmar •

st lb
3 Reinark lO 2
Shinrone lO 2
L Rattrap .......... 2
Oscar 10 2
Maurice Daley lO 2
Geraldus lO 2
Betsy Prig lO 0
Slattern lO 0
Dearest Mae lO 0
The Brewer 9 12
Simple Peter 9 12
Benedict 9 10
Little Charley 9 10
The Rearer
Poll 9 10
Vengeance 9 10
View Halloo 9 10
Maley
Kilquade
Advance 9 10
Ringleader
Clatterbox
Odin 9 8
Friendless 9 8
Ringdove 9 6
Yorkshirenian 9 6
Crabbs
Tempest 9 0
The Dwarf 9 0
Harmony 9 0
Mary Machree ...... 8 7

THE DOGS OF LINCOLNSHIRE.—The destruction of
scores of dogs which infest Lincoln and its neighbour-
hood has become an absolute necessity. There are
numbers of famished animals prowling about which have
been discarded, and recently several children have been
bitten. There have latterly been no less than five cases
in the County Hospital of boys who have been seriously
bitten by these wandering dogs. The other day one of
these animals savagely attacked a man at Ingham, and
the same dog attacked a little boy at Carlton, named•
Kettleborough, and severely lacerated his hand. The
dog was traced to Lincoln, And there hist sicrht
Stamford Mercury.