The Sun.
London, England, 1842-05-06 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE

HOUSE OF LORDS.-(THIS DAY.)
The House sat to-day to hear appeals. The Peers present
were the Lord Chancellor, Lord Brougham, Lord Cottenham
and Lord Campbell.

CHARTER V. SIR J. TREVELYAN.
Sir T. Wunit resumed his reply to-day in this ease, and had
not concluded when we went to press.

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)
His Honour the Vice-Chancellor of ENGLAND was occupied
the whole morning with short causes and unopposed petitions.
(Before Vice-Chancellor Wtu RA )
JOHNSON V. JOHNSON.

In this cause, which was heard a few days since, his Honour
made the following order :—" It appearing that a lease might be
settled if the estate was sold, the Court orders that the estate
be sold, without prejudice to the absent parties, if any."
After disposing of several motions, totally devoid of interest,
Counsel not being ready to proceed with the causes which were
set down for hearing, the Court rose at half-past ten.

QUEEN S BENCH.-(THIS DAY.)
The Middlesex Grand Jury came into Court this morning,
having found one true bill. 'There being no other business be-
fore them, they were thanked for their services by Mr. Justice,
Patteson and discharged.

THE QUEEN V. THE LONDON AND GREENWICH RAILWAY

COMrANT.

In this case a rule had been obtained calling upon the
London and Greenwich Railway Company to show cause why
a mandamus should not issue, calling upon them to purchase
the whole of the property of the Alessrs. Sloe, connected with
their vinegar manufactory, on the west side of Church• street,
Bermondsey. The property consisted of a brewery and vinegar
manufactory, the dwelling-house, occupied by Arr. N. Slee,
the resident partner, with a garden attached to it, ar. d five
small cottages occupied by different tenants. It appeared that
the extension line of the railway passed within fifty feet of the
house, and a part of the garden occupied by Mr. Noah Slee.
By the 47th section of the Greenwich Railway Act it was
enacted that inasmuch as premises might be deteriorated
in value by the railroad passing near it, any per-
son having premises within fifty feet of the railroad
should have the power of compelling the Company to purchase
such property so situated, within fifty feet of the railroad; and
by the 46th section, it was enacted " That if the Company re-
quired to purchase any portion of certain property mentioned
in a schedule annexed to the Act, the persons holding such
land should not be required to sell such portion unless the
Company purchased the whole."
The SottcrTort-GENERAL, on behalf of the Company,
showed cause against the rule, and contended that the Com-
pany were not compellable to purchase the whole property
under the provisions of the 46th section. The Company were
not desirous to take any part of it. But as the Messrs. Slee
had called upon them to purchase all that portion within 50
feet) of the railway, they were not bound to take more. The
Company had made an offer without prejudice to take the
whole of the dwelling-house and of the garden attached, but
they refused to take the manufactory. And he contended
that the Company were justified in their refusal, inasmuch as
the case did not come within the provisions of the 46th section,
because the Company were not desirous of purchasing any por-
tion of the property at all. He therefore submitted that therule
must be discharged.

Mr. THESIGiR and Mr. ERLE in support of the rule argued
that the Greenwich Railway Company when they obtained
their Act entered into a contract with the public, who
were proprietors of land near which the railway was to pass,
and that they must be bound by that contract. Now it
was a portion of that agreement that they should take the pro-
perty within fifty feet of the railway, if the proprietors were
desiioll3 of compelling them to do se. It passed within fifty feet
of one potion of these premises, and these premises constituting
one manufactory were an entirety, and could not be severed
any more than a house could be divided in two ; and, therefore,
it was submitted that the mandamus must go.
Lord llsrifitan, in giving judgment, said that it was the
opinion of the Court that the 47th section did not apply to this
ease, and that all that the Company could be compelled to do,
was to purchase such portion of the premises as were within
fifty feet of the line of Railway, under the provisions of
the 46th section. That the Company were willing to do, and it
did not seem to him that the words of the Act were large
enough to compel the Company to do more. The Company
had offered to purchase the premises within fifty feet of the
Railway, and that was all that they could be called upon to do.
The other Judges concurred.—Rule discharged.