The Sun.
London, England, 1859-02-22 00:00:00

SUN LON b" TUESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 22, 1859,
THE , 4,

74W INTELLIGENCE- (THIS DAY.)

COURT OF CHANCERY.
-;ore the Lords Justices.)
(Be.
APPEAL-JUDGMENT-:ELL V. THE MIDLAND RAILWAY
COMP-
`
This was an appeal from a decfs.:2l:l of Vice-Chancellor
Sir William Page Wood, declaring that the plaintiff was
entitled to the use of the side line or communication from
his lands to the railway wharf of the Midland Railway
Company, and other incorporated railways, and to their
stations.
Lord Justice Knight 13ruce and Lord Justice Turner
were decidedly of opinion that the plaintiff was entitled to
the use of both the old and new lines made by him under
the Act of Parliament.

_
Lord Justice Knight Bruce disapproved of the conduct
ofthe defendants as a corporate body. Their object appeared
to be to increase their dividends at the expense of the plain-
tiff. If they had been acting in a private capacity they
would have acted differently. In the end they would find
that " honesty was the best policy."
Their Lordships affirmed the decision of the Vice-
Chancellor, and dismissed the appeal with costs.

ROLLS COURT.
(Before the Master of the Rolls, Sir John Roluilly.)
SHERIFFS' SEIZURE Or FURNITURE AT EING'S.CROSS-

PENNY Y. HALE-JUDGUENT.

This case came before his Honour the Master of the Rolls
on motion for an injunction, and for decree. His
honour refused the injunction, and, having hoard
counsel, now delivered judgment in the cause. He said
—T am of opinion that when the Sheriff seizes goods
which does not belong to the judgment debtor, that the
seizure is at the risk of the person who employs him. That
as soon as notice is given to the Sheriff that the goods
seized, which are supposed to be the property of
the judgment debtor, are, in point of fact, not his
property, but the property of some other person,
then it is the duty of the judgment creditor to
take all necessary steps for the purpose of making
inquiry whether they are really and truly the goods of the
judgment debtor. If it does not appear that this notice
was given by the claimant to the judgment creditor, the
judgment creditor may properly dispose of these goods. He
is entitled to do so until he has submitted to him evidence
to satisfy him that they are the property of a third person,
and not the property of the judgment debtor. He
may adopt ono of two courses—he may ..prove that
they are not the property of the judgment debtor,
or he May file n bill of interpleader, and prove that he was
the person that was entitled to take these goods, and he
will be entitled to the costs of the suit. His Honour said
that when this claim was first made by the lady under this
deed ho entertained doubts of the bona fine: of the claim,
and ordered the lady and her husband, and the soli-
citor who prepared the deed, to bo examined, and the
result of that examination satisfied him that the deed
executed by the husband in favour of his wife was a bona
fide trust-deed, transferring his furniture to her although

•
the trustee declined to act. She was allowed to select the
furniture belonging to her, but in doing so she caused some
delay and costs. His Honour directed a new trustee to be
appointed for the lady, and ordered defendant to pay costs
of suit to the plaintiff, except such costs as plaintiff caused
in the selection of the furniture subsequent to January, '59
—these costs to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant.
The Sheriff's costs to be paid mutually by the plaintiff and
defendant, and quo ad ultra, each party to pay their own
costs.

E.-(THIS DAY.)