The Sun.
London, England, 1851-04-26 00:00:00

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

IN RE WHALLEY.
His HONOUR gave judgment in this case, which ign
an application made on Wednesday for a four daYe
order against the defendant.
It appeared that there were matters of account be:,
tween him and Mr. Cole, upon which an order was take;
by consent, 26th Feb., by which Whalley agreed to PV
304 in discharge of a claim fur 441.. for costs, within
days, which has not been paid. It was stated by ow,
Whalley, that he called at the residence of Cole, ifi`
order to pay him the money, but could not obtain all 10
terview with him for that purpose, and that there op:
no one at his place of abode empowered to receive thy
money. It was urged on the other side, that Cole's 0:
licitor held a power of attorney to receive the amono'
agreed to be paid by the order of the 26th February'
but Mr. Whalley objected that the execution of the
power of attorney was not verified by affidavit, and that
before the present motion could be renewed the coal
should be paid, and in default, that the plaintiff had he
locus stand].
His HONOUR now confirmed the order.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY•)
(Before Vice Chancellor BRUCE.)
Ills Honour was occupied this morning with adjonz734
petitions.

(Before Lord CRANWORTH.)
His Lordship having disposed of a number of unor
posed petitions, proceeded with the motion-paper.
(Before Vice-Chancellor TURNER.),
MILNE V. ➢IILNE.
The arguments in this part-heard case were resume
this morning.
Mr. Malins concluded his argument for the defendsa
this morning, and Mr. Elmslie followed on the a aine
side.

QUEEN'S BENCH.—(THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
THE QUEEN V. MANCHESTER AND SOUTH JUNCTXO
RAILWAY COMPANY.
In this case the railway company appealed 80°9;
the assessment made on the railway by the assessors °f
the poor for Manchester, on the ground that it was 111
0
the same rate as the assessment made on the land in SP,
vicinity, which were of greater value than the land
the company with the rails upon it.
Mr. PEACOCK contended, on the part of the respoir
dents, the overseers of the parish, that a railway col;
ttu"
pany had no right to depreciate valuable land in a pa r'eA,
without paying the same rate of assessment as the la
adjoining the railway.
The COURT, without calling on Sir Fitzroy Kelly;W' f
appeared on behalf of the appellants, said they war" ".,
opinion that land appropriated for a railway, under 61'
Act of Parliament, could not be rated as if it were 10°.
cupied. The rate should, therefore, be reduced.—Judg-
ment for the appellants.

COMMON PLEA S.—(THIS DAY-)
(Sittings in Banco.)
ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH CODIPANY V. BRETT.--JuDGM ,
This WfIS an action to recover compensation ;
damages for an alleged infringement of a patent for the
construction of electric telegraphs, in which a verdP
was found for the plaintiffs on all the material issues. d
A rule for a new trial was subsequently obtained,
it came on for argument during the last term.
The COURT now delivered judgment. They earn-
lo
dered that the improvements made by the plaintil n
the sounding of alarms, in giving railway signals, an to
making duplicate signals so as to convey messages
intermediate stations, were likely to be of great adv...
:e
tage, and might be made the subject of aaepar
patent. They were, therefore, of opinion that the •-
ought to be discharged.—Bale discharged according'''.

EXCHEQUER.—( THIS DAY.)
(Sittings in Banco.)
GRIFFIN V. HUMPHREY. doe This action was tried before the Lord Chief v 115,1012
of the Queen's Bench at the lag sittings ill 103.9 w--
Wall a Tordict Was Anuld for the plaintiff.