The Sun.
London, England, 1858-05-24 00:00:00

COURT OF CHANCERY.
(Before the L')rd Cbancellor,)
IN RE THE LONDON AND EASTERN BXNICING CORPORATION.

JUDGUENT.

Two pinta of contentnyi were tai.ed in this case:—
let, the validity of the fiat of bankruptcy of this corn•
pant? ; and 2d, the legality of the proceedings at law by
Sir Charles Forbes and Company, creditors of this com-
pany, in obtaining a judgment of the Court of Exchequer
again, t the company on a bill of exchange after the fiat
of bankruptcy had been issued and an official manager
appointed.
The Lord Chancellor, after minutely examining and
considering the several clauses in the different Acts of
Parliament relative to the proceedings in bankruptcy in
banking corporations and companies, was of opinion
that, al hough a creditor was entitled to take a judg-
ment of a court of law upon his debt, yet he was b ,und
to proceed under the bankruptcy when a fiat of bank-
ruptcy is granted and an official manager appointed.
His lordshipaffirmed the fiat of bankruptcy, and granted
an injunction restraining Sir Charles Forbes and Com.
pany from proceeding in any other way to recover pay-
ment of their debt than under the resent bankruptcy.
Costs to be paid out of the common fund.

ROLLS COURT.
(Before the Master of the Rolls.)
JENSIN V. CLINTON.—JUDGMENT.
His Honour, the Master of the Rolls, said this was a
demurrer to the plaintiff's bill for want of equity. The
contention between the parties arose upon the construc-
tion to be put upon the will of the deceased Thomas
Jenkins, who died in 179 E. And the question raised
was, whether the testator, by his will, demised an estate
in fee or in tail only in favour of his great•grand-nephew
Thomas, William, and Joseph. His Honour, after
minutely examining and considering the different clauses
in the will, came to the cone union that the testate r
demised an estate in tail only, and not in fee, and that
the plaintiff was not entitled to the relief asked by his
bill.
The demurrer was allowed, without costs, and the bill
dismissed.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
(Sittings in Banco before Lord Campbell, Justices Cole-
ridge, Erie, and Wightman.
THE EMMEN( LOCAL BOARD OF HEALTH._MANDAMUS•
Mr. Lush, Q C., applied for a rule calling upon the
Burster° Local Board of Health to show cause why a
mandamus should not issue against them to compel them
to grant compensation and appoint an arbitrator in the
event of dispute for damage done to certain property in
the town owing to their being sunk shafts for sewers to
the injury of the property referred to. The injury was
estimated at 1691.
Rule granted.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
(Sittings in Banco, before the Lord Cbief Baron Po

lock, Barons Martin, Bramwell, and Wat4on.)

PRICE Y. PRICE—CANCELLING A WILL—,JUDGMENT.
Tuis was an action of ej,,ctinent tried a second time
before Mr. Justice Crowder, at Brecon, and the ques-
tion turned upon the cancelling of a will. It appeared
that the deceased shortly before his death tore off the
seals of his will, saying he would make a fresh one, but
before he could do so he died, and it was contended
that under the circumstances this wag not a cancelling
or revokation of the will as against the parties who
were to be benefitteo. Trio Court without entering int)
the question of " cancelling," generally, held that; in
this case, the tearing off of the seal was a revokation or
cancelling of it.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
;Sittings in Banco, before the Lord Chief Justice Cock
burn, Justices Williams, Willis, and Byles.)
IdETCALFE AND ANOTHER V. LONDON AND BRIGHTON