The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1866-12-27

Erenang Mad 10 NJ rlUmas Plau, through. =
time " fAe eso6 tsament @ me fvrssg Ad1 d
had been Hs pvac.ce ppy II vitA yc and waiter rom
Me a.aes eoe Vas s.laasaly an sverina ed.f,o" q
The Times aerspape. That mods Of publishing the Ev-
ING Adu had continued without any interruption until
1884, when the plaintiff Mr. John Waler gave notice 70
which then subsis,ed between the tive papers shouh DO
dissolved from tho 3lst Of Decenster In that year
Further negotiations ensued and utissy the bills in
these sus were flied for tho purposes already mentioned
The plaintiff in tho first suit obtained the 10th Of
January. 1885. injunction from Vice Chsnceor Wood
LEGATION Of the Epeins MAJ Until the hearing OF the
causes When that Injunction was granteA tho Court
expressed an opinion tsat TIE length # d,rlre ~hrA
fhc Ev ming Nal had enjoyed The privilege ~ being sup
piled NTH type and matter from ne London 7ines ~igk BE-
inportaH element in the argusenh at the hearing Of the
Of the court End now came on TO BE- heard accordingly
The Attorney General and Mr. Bagshawe appeared for
the plaintiffs IN the first SUIT; SIR Rounded Palmer, Mr.
Mr.. Bacon, Mr. Greene, Mr.. Craig, Mr Speed. Mr. Boys
and Mr. Piummer for other parties interested In the
suits.
The Woe Chancellor, after hearing only the counsel
for the plaintiffs and those who supported them In the
first suit said that bat for the observations OF the vc
Chancellor Sir William Page Wood, be should have felt
no doubt whatever to this II stood thus-thers
were two sets OF persons Of them the
the proprietors OF the Trs newspaper Originally the
two papers belonged TO one person but In 1870 trans
action took place which had the effect Of creating
separate partnership In the papers, and this partnership
had been ever since carried on. under separste aud
dstanct agreements. II was alleged on behalf of the
plaintiffs In the nrst suit that they had right
against the proprietors Of the Tises Newspaper to
have type and matter uupplied TO hcan grntultousy
for The use Of the Evenis0 Mail. II tbere wore any
euch right II must bo founded either upon express
or an implied contract The Vice Chancellor Sir w. p.
Wood seemed 70 have thought that there such an
usage NJ :aght possibly amount to the comforting Of
right. The title of the plaintiffs in the first suit arose
from sale BY the propreIors Of the Evening Mail OF
some shares In that paper Bot II sale OF shares
in the Ecesrg Mail only and II there had beenany in.
ention on tho part OF the vendors OF their reservng
rights against The Tms newspaper such reservation
would have been found In the instrument Of assignment
But there was trace Of anything OF the sort, and
nothing TO show that there any prvy between the
Times newspaper propnetors and the then purchaser Of
tho shares in the Erening MAIL That transaction. there
fore, afforded ground for the i'm pllcaton OF contract
rs alleged bohaf OF the plaintiffs in tho Grst SUN.
Tho other transactions from which II Was sought 10
imply contract thcse-there being actual
right the part OF the Eccning Nal to be furnished
with literary matter and type by the Times nows-
paper, tho former paper had been for many
years so supplied But could be said that be-
cause tho propretors Of the Timer newspaper had
since 1920 made rich allowance D. the Ece
ming Mail therefore essrae mrs BE- implied against
the Times newspaper TO continue such asuppyy More
over there was here no consideration moving from the
proprietors OF the Looming Mail 10 those OF the Tni,s
newspaper. There was nothing than permission
on the part Of those gentlemen the Others to publish
during period OF many years the articles and necs from
the Times paper. Had there been anything In the evil
dcnce OF the TO show when Mr. Plat purchased
prospect Of the continuance OF the permission to pub
lish the Times articles and and ground for
ing shat Mr. Patt paid his money the faith Of such rep
rcsenation those who claimed through him might
perhaps, have insisted upon some equity. But there
was nothing of the sort in the evidence anything To
show that the assignors OF the shares In Ercnig
MAJ had any right to bind the propreors Of the Times
newspaper. There was, therefore, contract TO be
implied from that part OF the Indeed II
In which the feelings Of the parties lad much conduced
To tho arrangements actually entered into--Arrange.
nients which, II considered, convenient TO
every ono concerned. But the Court TO say, be-
cause such arrangements were convenient they were
never TO be Interrupted Upon tho whole case II APP
peared that there contract between the parties
either express implied, and that the bill in iat
Walter must be dismissed must be dismissed with
costs, except so far II prayed derce for d-sou on
OF hepartnershp, and for accounts. There must he
sale Of the Ersning Mcl but the proprietors Of tns
Times c0nsentng TO ia publication heretofore until
the sale. Liberty might be reserved 10 Apply With
tn