The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1847-06-01 00:00:00

FLETCHER,

VOLLAMS 27

This was an action by an allottee against a Director of
an abortive Railway Company, entitled the Birmind ham
and West Bromwich Railway Company, to recover back
the deposit on ten shares. pursuant to the principle es-
tablished in " Walstab v. Spottiswoode," In order to
substantiate his claim it became necessary for the plaintiff
to tender in evidence the letter‘of application and that of
allotment, which, not being stamped, were rejected by
the Lord Chief Baron, and the plaintiff was consequently
non-suited, leave being reserved to the plaintiff to move
to enter a verdict for him, or for a new trial. A rule to
this effect having been obtained in Hilary Term by Mr.
Martin, cause was now shown against it by Mr. Chilton
and Mr. Ball, but

The Court were unanimously of opinion that the letters
did not require an agreement stamp, and that the verdict
should consequently be entered for the plaintiff.
Judgment for the plaintiff.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.-SATURDAY

THE LAW OF RAILWAY DEPOSITS

-WOOLMER V. TOBY

This case, which has created so great an interest in the
railway world, came on for judgment this morning.
Upon their Lordships taking their seats, Lord Denman
proceeded to read the judgment, and said that, on the part
of the defendant, after he had made an application to the
general body of the Company for his allotments some
names had been withdrawn from the prospectuses, and
other names had been added. Upon this point the defend-
ant contended that he was entitled either to accept or re-
fuse the shares. In our opinion his contract was not
made with this body of directors, and therefore he was
entitled to take or refuse the shares, and upon this ground
we are of opinion that a verdict ought to be entered for
the defendant ; but, looking at the other point of the case,
the Court did not think it necessary to express an opinion
on it, as they had already disposed of the case by entering
a nonsuit on it ; but, if it were necessary to consider that
point, the Court would be disposed to sustain that objec-
tion. Under these circumstances, the judgment of the
Court would be entered for the defendant.
The result of this decision is, that the Provisional Com-
mittee cannot sue for any deposits ; and in cases where
any alteration has taken place in the body of directors,
then they cannot bring an action to recover the value of
any allotment of shares made by the original Company.

Notice of intended application to be admitted attorneys
of the Court of Queen's Ber ch on the first day of
Michaelmas Term next, were on Tuesday given by 168
articled clerks, making, with 158 admitted this Trinity
' Term, a total of 324 attorneys to be added to the roll.
SUMMER ASSIZES.—The Judges of the different law
courts met in the Exchequer Chamber this morning, and
chose their respective circuits in the ensuing Summer
Assizes. The following is the arrangement :—Northern
Circuit: Lord Chief Baron Pollock and Mr. Justice
Wightman.—Midland : Lord Chief Justice Denman and
Mr. Baron Rolfe.--Western ; Lord Chief Justice Wilde
and Mr. Justice Williams.—Home: Mr. Baron Parke
and Mr. Justice Coltman.—Oxford: Mr. Justice Cole-
ridge and Mr. Justice Erle.—Norfolk : Mr. Baron Al-
derson and Mr. Justice Patt a n.—North Wales. Mr.
Justice Maule.—South Wales : Mr. Justice Creswell.—
Mr. Baron Platt remains in town, and will attend busi-
ness at Chambers during the vacation.
A WIG SCENE.—Thursday being the Queen's bi rthday
the judges appeared in full-bottomed wigs, and the
Queen's counsel were in full dress. Mr. Knowles Q.C.,
appeared in the Bail Court without his full-dress and full-
' bottomed wig. Mr. Justice Coleridge who presided, did
not at first notice this, but asked him if he had anything
to move? The learned gentleman accordingly rose to
move, which excited a titter amongst his learned brethren.
This attracted the judge's attention to the fact that Mr.
Knowles was not in finery, upon which Mr. Justice Cole-
ridge said : Oh! what have I been about? I must have
been dreaming when I thought I saw Mr. Knowles—Mr.
Knowles is not in court. (Laughter.) Mr. Knowles
(pointing to the highly ornamental dress of Mr. Crowther,
who sat near him) : My Lord, I could not wear this dress,
because—. Mr. Justice Coleridge: Oh, never mind—Mr.
Knowles is not in court—it was my mistake—l was
dreaming, that's all.—(Loud laughter). The ordinary
business of the court then proceeded.
IMPORTANT CASE.—LIABILITY OF PASSENGER
BROKIERS.—On Tuesday, Mr. George Saul, passenger
broker, Waterloo-road, appeared before Mr. Lowndes, in
the County Court, in answer to summonses which hatl
been obtained against him by three of the passengers of
the ill-fated Rochester, which sailed from this port some
time back, and which was lost on the coast of Ireland.
The complainants sought the recovery of the passage-
money, alleging that the defendant had not completed the
contract they had entered into with him, which was to
convey them to New York. Mr. Blair, barrister, ap-
peared for Mr. Saul. In his examination the latter gen-
tleman said he had been a passenger broker since the year
1837 ; that the Rochester had been declared by competent
authority fit to go to sea ; that he had furnished her with
the requisite quantity of bread stuffs for the passengers he
had put on board : that the vessel had duly sailed from
the port, and that he had never heard of an instance in
which a passenger broker had been liable to return the
passage money in cases where the vessel had been lost
through the perils of the sea. Mr. Blair addressed the
court at considerable length, citing authorities to prove
that complainants could not recover when losses occurred
from perils of the sea. Mr. Lowndes reserved his deci-
sion till Thursday, when he gave judgment to the effect
that the contract between the parties was an unconditional
one, to land these passengers at the place of destination,
no exceptions haviag been made in the contract ; and that
an order fur the amount, with costs in each case, be made
gainst the defendant.