The Sun.
London, England, 1849-02-17 00:00:00

btrb

LONDON AND SOUTH-WESTERN
RAILWAY.—(THIS DAY.)
The adjourned half-yearly meeting of the proprietors
of the above company was held this afternoon, at the
Nine Elms Station; Mr. Chaplin, M.P., in the chair.
The SECRETARY announced that the result of the poll
upon the steam-boat question was as follows:—
For the original motion 1,673
For the amendment

Majority in favour of directors... 844
The guarantee to the Steam-boat Company was put to
the vote and agreed to.
The result of the poll for the election of the direction
was as follows :

For Colonel Henderson
Ker Seymer, M.P.
Colonel Reid
Sergeant Gaselee 921
The three first three gentlemen were accordingly de-
clared to be the successful candidates, and duly elected.
Colonel REID returned thanks for his election, and
promised to do all in his power to promote the interest
of the company.
Mr. BAKER admitted that the steam-boat question
was now at an end, but he gave notice, that at the
next meeting he should submit a resolution to the pro-
prietors on the subject of the goods' traffic, which he
considered was badly conducted. They ought to aban-
don the mixed system, and become their own carriers.
The CHAIRMAN defended the existing system, and in-
sisted that it was the best that could possibly be adopted
either for the interest of the company or the protection
of the public.
Mr. Sergeant GASELEE admitted that be had been
fairly beaten by his opponent for a seat in the direction,
but he did not despair of ultimately succeeding. He
should offer himself again at the next vacancy, and at
the midsummer meeting he should move that the steam-
boat proprietors be paid off and done with.
After a lengthened desultory conversation upon the
details of the line, which involved no feature of public
interest,
It was announced that the result of the poll on the re-
solution for agreeing to the recommendation in the re-
port relative to the new lines had been carried by a
majority of 99.
Mr. GASELEE then moved that on the 10th of January
in each year a list of the proprietors, together with their
addresses, should be made out, but no one seconded the
motion, and it fell to the ground.
The Learned SERGEANT then suggested that in future
the dividends should always be paid on fixed days.
The CHAIRMAN promised that the suggestion should
be considered by the directors.
An irregular conversation then arose upon the cir-
cumstance of the name of Colonel Reid having been
placed before that of Sergeant Gaselee in tthe proxy
papers sent out, notwithstanding that the Learned
Sergeant had been first in the field, and it Avail arranged
that in future the candidate who first gave notice of his
intention to solicit the suffrages should take precedence
of any others.
Mr. Sergeant GASELEE then moved that in future
the sending round of proxies by the directors at the ex-
pense of the company, to support particular measures,
or secure the re-election of retiring directors, or for any
purpose whatever
without the sanction of the general
meeting, should be discontinued.
Colonel CAMERON seconded the motion.
The CHAIRMAN opposed it, • and upon a show of
hands it was declared to be lost.
Mr. CLOSE, the auditor, complained that a number of
erroneous statements had been made at the meeting
on Thursday, which had greatly depreciated the value
of the property. It was said that in a few years the
dividend would be reduced to two-and-a-half per cent,
Nothing could be more untrue. At present they were
paying five per cent. on upwards of six millions, and he
could assure them, having carefully examined the ac-
counts, that their dividend would never be lower than
four per cent., while it might mount up.
Thanks were then voted to the Chairman, and the
meeting terminated.

COMMON PLEAS.—(THIS DAY.)
;Sittings at Nisi: Prius, at Guildhall, before the Lord
Chief Justice WILDE, and a Special Jury.)
cox V. JAMES.

This was an action brought to recover 200 guineas, the
deposit money paid upon 100 shares, at two guineas per
share, by the plaintiff, in a railway schome,,called the
South Midland Junction, Bicester, Honiton, Marlbo-
rough, Devizes, and Salisbury Railway.
Mr. Cockburn, Q.C., and Mr. Bovill appeared for the
plaintiff, and the Attorney-General and Mr. Sergeant
Bytes represented the defendant.
Mr. COCKBURN, in stating the plaintiff's case, said the
railway project in question was started in 1845, by Mr.
William Jamvs, a solicitor, in conjunction with Mr. John
James, the defendant, who held the office of Secondary in
thy corparaticn of London. The action was brought against
the defendant as having signed the scrip certificates on
n hich the plaintiff sought to recover the amount of his
deposits. The nature of this scheme was that it was to
connect the lines in the south-west of England with the
midland and northern lines, by traversing tho country
from Salisbury right across to Swindon, and it was to
throw out branches in various directions. An advertise-
ment was put forward, setting forth, among other things,
Mr. William James as the solicitor, and his brother,
Mr. John James, the defendant, as a provisional director;
and the plaintiff, Mr. Cox, having been captivated by
that advertisement, applied for a certain number of shares
in the concern, and had 100 shares allotted to him.
It was the practice resorted to by many people
who projected railways in 1845, in order to obtain pay-
ment of the deposits with as mach rapidity as possible,
to publish statements setting forth that the shares had
been all allotted, and that the number of applications
had been so great that it was found impoasibie to com-
ply with the wishes of the numerous applicants. The
plaintiff having seen an advertisement of that kind re-
lating to the company in question, and believing that the
company was in a flourishing condition, and that all the
shares had been allotted, went and paid his deposits on
the 26th of September, 1845, and executed the
deeds which were required of him by the terms
of the general undertaking. The plaintiff then
received the scrip certificates for one hundred
shares' signed by the present defendant, Mr. John
James, as one of the directors. It was on that ground
that Mr. James was now made the defendant in the ac-
tion. Shortly after this it appeared that this scheme,
instead of being followed up by the directors, as they
had originally put it forth to the public, was sunk alto-
gether by them. Whether the company was ever in-
tended or expected to be really brought into operation—
whether the scheme was intended to be really carried
oat, he (Mr. Cockburn) did not take upon himself to
say affirmatively or not ; but it was never carried out,
and did not appear to have been followed up. They
united themselves first with a scheme called the
West Midland, and, lastly, they merged it in another
scheme called the Southampton and Manchester; and
they put forth an advertisement, in which they an-
nounced to the shareholders that they had done so. The
attempt at amalgamation with the Southempton and
Manchester ended in a complete failure, and it was fairly
abandoned, the directors making an offer to the indivi-
dual shareholders of 1/. 7s. 6d. on those deposits on
which they had originally paid two guineas a share.
This Mr. Cox, the plaintiff, refused to accept, and hence
the present action. _ _

The case was proceeding when our report left.

ARCHES' COURT.-THIS DAY.)

GORHAM V. THE BISHOP OF EXETER.
Sir HERBERT JENNER Farr delivered the judgment
of the Court this morning in this case, on the prelimi-
nary objection taken and argued on a former day on the
part of the plaintiff, that the Bishop having allowed
twenty-eight days to expire from the application of the
plaintiff to be instituted to the living of Bamford Spoke, in
the county of Devon, and diocese of Exeter (to which he
had been previously presented by the Lord Chancellor),
before commencing his examination of the plaintiff,
and that therefore the examination of the plain-
tiff, to which the Bishop of Exeter submitted
Mr. Gorham, was a nullity by a canon of the Church.
His Honour delivered the judgment of the Court at
great length, and decreed that, under the canon of the
Church which had been relied on by the plaintiff's eoun-
belt the Bishop was not prohibited from commencing and
continuing his examination of the plaintiff as to the
soundness of his doctrine within 28 days from the plain-
tiff's application to the Bishop to be presented to the
therefore, in favour of the
living. The judgment was,
Bishop of Exeter.
Dr. ADDAMS then addressed the Court for the Bishop
on the merits of the case, and was proceeding when our
report left.

MA RLBRO'-STREET—( THIS DAY.)
A DISHONEST SERVANT.—John Timmins, a coach-
man, in the service of Messrs. Hunt and Roskell, silver.
smiths, 156, New Bond-street, and Margaret, his wife,
were rought before Mr. Hardwick, the former charged
with stealing four gold salt-spoons, the property of his
employers, and the latter with having offered the same
in pledge, well knowing them to have been stolen.
John Fry, assistant to Mr. Dobree, pawnbroker, Gil-
bert-street, Oxford-street, stated that last night, about
six q'clock, the female prisoner came into his employer's
shop and offered the foer gold spoons produced in pledge.
Witness, knowing that her husband was in the employ
of Messrs. Hunt and Roskell, suspected that she had
not come by them honestly, and asked her whose pro-
perty they were. The prisoner replied, " Oh, it is of no
consequence; put my name down ; it is all the same,
you know me well., He refused to do so; when
she said they were the property of a lady who
was very much reduced in circumstances. Witness then
went and consulted with Mr. Dobree, who directed him
to give the prisoner in charge. During the absence of
witness the prisoner ran out of the shop. Witness sub-
sequently went with a constable to Messrs. Hunt and
Roskell's, who identified the spoons as having been
stolen from their stock. The constable then went with
witness to the stables in Barlow-mews, and the priso-
ners were taken into custody.

Police.sugeant 9 D said be took the prisoners into