Skip to main content
The largest online newspaper archive

Daily News from London, Greater London, England • 6

Publication:
Daily Newsi
Location:
London, Greater London, England
Issue Date:
Page:
6
Extracted Article Text (OCR)

THE '-DAILY MEWS, WEDNESDAY EEBRITAKY 1852. 8 into the causes of removal. The could inquire nnnrt was of to the failure, and showed debts amounting to 1 5592 w'Tt assets estimated at 2182. The profits had been I 232f capital 9002. losses 4142.

trade expenses 2,2732, owli opinion that the construction of the act contended lor applying for the rule was out 7152. not consistent cither with principle or authority, and till some defect in the proceedings was pointed out there could had been the attorney of Mrs. Jones, and had also lent her money. Mrs. Jones had pleaded the statute of limitations, to defeat which the plaintiff produced a written acknowledgment of the debt.

The plaintiff had written to Mrs. Jones desiring her to send him a statement of her accounts in order that he might consult counsel upon her affairs she hud done so, and she had added the item of her debt to the plaintiff. On the part of the defendant it was contended and 46 feet was not such a case, unless it could bo shown that irreparable injury would ensue by allowing the building to be used. The case, therefore, rested on the uses as a custom house and for bed rooms. And that question depended on the construction of the 16th section of the act that section provided that the whole of the land to be sold to the company should be appropriated to and used for the railway, and the purposes thereof, except such part as should be reauired bv the Board of Ordnance, or for the Duroose Mr.

Linklater, for the assignees, asked for adiourn ment, the accounts' having been only just filed. Auiounw Hato $nteUtgence NOTICES THIS DAY. COURT OF CUANCERY, LINCOLN'S-INN. At 10. UnroBE tbk Loud CiMNCEixon.

Motion by order: the Queen v. Stciuer. Appeal motions He Shrewsbury nnd Leicester Direct Railway Company ex pane Britiain re North of England bunking Company parte Nolsonana another re Oxford, Worcester, and Cluster Junction Kailway Company; ex parte Sharp; Evans v. Trothero; AUurnpy-Gcntrat v. Corporation of Exeter la re St.

john'a Hospital petition by order, part heard. AT 10. Befoisb the Lokds Justices. Lunatic petitions unop. posed first) ro Hewson, Kecnedv, Curaming (2), Bramble, Fowler, journal, had filled up the measure of his iniquity by naming the statue of Rotteck, the voluminous historian, after ISerthold and by publishing a number of imaginary appointments of generals.

The Fremden B'att (Strangers' List) is a small printed sheet about the size of a lady's pocket handkerchief, and contains merely announcements of the theatres and other amusements for the day, the list of arrivals at the various hotels, advertisements, and a few paragraphs, all copied from other papers, foreign or domestic. It is, moreover, ludicrously accordingly. In be Shutilewortk. The bankrupt was an ironmonger and upholster Saffron Waklen. This was the meeting for the i It 'J that the paper bad been given in confidence to the plaintiff be no rule.

Sir F.Kelly complained that whereas the charges against Mr. Ramshay originated in a memorial on the subject of his conduct in the case of the committal of Mr. Whitty, the editor of a newspaper in Liverpool, other charges which were not contained in that memorial were brought forward. But fuch an inquiry ought to be on-ducted on the principles only of eternal justice, and not confined by technical rules, but should be conducted in a mode analogous to that which was adopted by the benchers nation. of widening the streets and approaches to thu station, and contained a proviso that the said land should not be used for building any cokehouses, or for any purpose which as ner proiessionai adviser, ana taat it could cot tneretore be produced at all.

A nonsuit was entered. Mr. Gray now showed cauBe against a rule which had been obtained to set aside the nonsuit or for a new trial. Mr. Linklater appeared for the bankrupt, nr.

to Tayler for the assignees. The balance sheet, prepared rT4 Mr. Whately and Mr. Keatincr aorjeared in support of the mignt De a nuisance or oy wmcn tne ocner property of the lord warden and assistants might bo damaged. The fact complained of here was, that one room was used exclusively bv custom house officers, and there was an ad rule, and argued that the admission had not been given to tao p.amtitt qua attorney, but that it had been given to zealous in the cause of the ministry its price is a kreuzer or something: less than a halfpenny.

Its joining room passengers, whose luggage was boing mm as oetween party antt party. Mr. Baron Parke of opinion that the rule oueht to Air. JKeloitte, ot aasingnau-street, extended over upwards of four years, prior to the failure in November last anfl showed 3,5382. due to unsecured creditors, and I 5832 tn those holding security assets, in good debts, 3GU- in p'rol perty, pioperty held by creditors, fpfcl profits had been 2,8762.

losses, 1,1022. bad debts 'im -trade expenses, 1,8082. domestic ditto, 1,0292. The bankrupt passed unopposed. cheapness and utility as a daily chroniclo of examined, migmwaiii anu unuwier wuero lugagu wmcn had been examined was deposited until removal to its be discharged.

The question was whether the communica 01 an 11m ui uuun wueu oeauiig wiwi tne contmer, 01 a oar-rister with a view to his being disbarred. It Was not alleged by Mr. Ramshay that the charges against him were not fully heard. Another complaint was, that after' the inquiry was closed the sentence of removal was pronounced without further notice to Mr. Ramshay calling on him to show cause why he should not be removed.

13ut the fair inference was that it was closed, and that the Chancellor of the Duchy only took time to consider his judgment. Last destination by the porters. This room was, therefore, to tion naa been maae by tne defendant to the plamtia nis character of. an attorney or of a creditor. If it had been made to him as a creditor it would be admissible.

He (Mr. some extent, usea lor purposes in connection witn tno rail IN RE JBARNJUM. events has rendered it almost a necessity to the Viennese, and it has an immense circulation. Its editor is M. Gustav Heine, brother of Heinrich Heine, the witty poet and how Vienna is to get on for 14 days without the Fremden IttaU'is something verv like a oroblem.

This was the last examination meef.mrr in i way, ana he could not say it was not so used Because some ottier person's luggage not going by railway might be examined there. The same arcurnent would aoolv to the case Baron Parke) considered, however, that the learned judge who had tried the case had ruled properly that it was made iu the character of an attorney, and that it was therefore xuuuiLut juuiuium, vxut: uicreauat, or I T- Tr. bedrooms, but with respect to them, he did not say such a user might not hereafter arise as would induce the court maamisBioie. In Hungary the government are actually pushing The other iudees concurred, Mr. Baron Piatt and Mr.

to interfere, but there was no evidence as yet to that extent before the court. He should, therefore, dismiss the Baron Martin, however, expiessing their regret that there 01 an, it was saia tnat tno judgment was vitiated by a private letter of Lord Carlisle to Mr. Ramshay, of the same date. Though liberty was given, to Ramshay to use that letter as he chose, it could not have been intended to vitiate the proceedings of a court of justice, but was only meant to mitigate the pain inflicted by the sentence, which sentence was consistent with the fact, that a man might have many valuable qualities, and be an amiable man in private Life, and yet be rpmnvprl for inahilitv nnd nilurinbfivmiiv frnm fho nffica removed for inability and misbehaviour from the office tilings so tar as to erect monuments in commemoration of the Austro-Russian victory. A strange vie motion without costs.

couia not De a new trial. Rule discharged. Before Yice-Chahcelioe Kindersiiy. SimNoB at Nisi at Westminster, Befokk the Loan tory, which still leaves it necessary to maintain the state of siege in almost every town, and after which the whole laud is still bristling with bayonets from one Plowden v. Htde.

Revocation of certain Devises chief Habon. and special Juries. Pelichet v. Loaden. Action against an Attor in A WILL.

The Vice-Chancellor delivered judgment in this case, of a ludgo. The rule would therefore he refused, ney to recover Compensation in Damages tor ToVq 7 extended from January, 1849, to November last, and contained some ctm siderablo items. The sum due to unsecured crudita 6,1532. to those holding security, 3,0442. The a-scts weS put down at 2,8542.

in good debts, and 2,4042. in nronortV Property to the amount of 3,4612. was held a sccuriS" The profits had been 4,3242. losses, 5652. trade' owS" domestic ditto, deficiency at the com mencement of the account, 2122.

Mr. Hawkins, for the assignees, said they had no ohie. tion to the bankrupt passing, with a slight alttratiou in tha balance-sheet referring to his transactions with Messrs Morgan. Mr. Lawrance, representing the bankrupt, uroed thaf the transaction was correctly stated.

After a conversation an alteration, suggested by the com. missioner was consented to. Mr. Gale, who appeared for Mr. J.

P. Gassiott, wina merchant, of Mark-lane, alanze creditor, statmi end to the other. It is well known that a civil war may break out any month in the year or almost any Crake v. Powell. Concohsent Jurisdiction of tbb Negligence in Investment op a Sum of Money.

which was argued some time ago. A. testator named Plowden, by his will dated in May 1811, devised to trustees clay in the month. Superior and County Courtb. This was a question as to whether, in an action for a sum Mr.

Serjt. Shee stated the case to the jury, and said that the plaintiff was a Mrs. Anna Maria Pelichet, and was all nrs estates, wnicn ne naa contracted to purchase, or to which he was entitled, as freehold, copyhold, or leasehold, One of the Austrian papers, however, the Lloyd, says that we have no reason to reprove the proceed the widow ol a Mr. unarles feucaet, who had beer an officer in the British army, and was afterwards a pro fessor at the Military College, at Sandhurst and the de to which the jurisdiction of the county court applied, costs in the superior court could be recovered when the parties lived twenty miles apart. The court was of opinion that the county court act in such a case gave a concurrent jurisdiction to the superior courts, and that costs were recoverable, in possession, expectancy, or remainder, on certain trusts therein specified.

Before the date of the will, the testator had mortgaged a portion of his freehold property to a person named Newton, for with a proviso for redemption declaring that upon repayment of the money, ings of Austria in Hungary and Italy, while the north of Ireland is kept in a state of siege (I suppose under the Crime and Outrage Act). The writer goes Swindell, Bones, stapyitonruuiiura, nay, right, uuunrupc pen-lions the Oxford Worcester and Wolverhampton Railway re Williams; Matheson re Htvthesoii. Motion; 13-uconre Bacon. Appeal, motions re London and Birmingham Extension Railway, part heard, VICE-CHANCELLORS' COTRT8, LINCOLN'S-INN. At 10.

liEFoiiu Tgrskb. Bassill LyBtcr; (part heard). To bo spoken to Beaby null. Causes, Ssc. Long v.

Slavic (2); Ronmieu v. Smith; BiUiiRov. Southee; Morrall v. Tinkler; Heath Baker Burrows v. Walls Mousloy v.

Agar Dyson v. Hyson Rogers v. Mort; King v. Phillips PhillipB v. Phillips Kussrdl Scurlock.

Bsfork Vicb-Ohanckllou Sir K. Kindbbsmy. Petition by order: Vnughan v. VanderstaRen. A portion of the adjourned petitions: In re Great North of England and Glasgow Railway Company, part heard; In re Freemen, of Sunderland, by order In re Bishop of Durham, by order In re York, Newcastle, end Berwick Railway Company, by order, In re Tookey's Devisees; Lawrence v.

Vaughan. Before Vice-Chanokllok Sib PARKEn. Short causes Arnold v. Arnold (2) Williamson v. Parker Humbercson v.

Cazenove Leycester v. Leycester L'itt v. Haward; Dobson v. Mattinson: IO-y Key; Grissell v. Demon; Nicholson t.

Price (2); Gill v. Jones. 7 short claims. 10 chiim. Moti-ms continued.

ROLLS COURT, CHANCERY-LANE. At 10, To bo spoken to: Stewart v. MartelL Causes: Paul t. Roy Brown v. Smiih Gleadow v.

the Official Manager of the Hull Glass Company Hollv. Gedge(2); Cable v. Cable; Bush v. Windey 11) Ro Middleton; Whitworth v. Brogden (8); Aufrere v.

Ilill; Fazakcrly v. Gillebiand; Ililesv, Moore; Brady v. Mardon (2). A1ASTKH.S' OFFICES, SOUTHAMPTON-BUILDINGS. Before Master Fauukr.

Newman v. White; Grimston v. Thompson; Harris v. Farwell; Armstrong v. Siorer ex parte Messenger (2) Ro Universal Salvage Company.

13khork Mastrr Brouoiiam Constable v. Farlrr; Williamson v. Farnell; Clements v. Lord Bercsford; Mintouv. Willaiott; Arning.

son v. Daubney Blaoklock Harland; Ruper v. Taylor; Hall v. Gedgo; He Lousada Nottidge v. Tebbs; Re Crutchfleld (2) Re Wolverhampton Railway; Attorney-General t.

Browne's Hospital; Gooch v. Gooch. Bsforb Sir William Hohne, Broughton vB Ryland; Wisden v. Wisden Wilcox v. Edmondson (2) Brown v.

Robertson Armstrong v. Armstrong Ro Merchant Traders' Ship Loan and Insurance Company; Ex parte Archbishop of TorK; Close v. Close; Brown v. Barnes (2); Attorney-General v. Tyler; Attorney-General v.

Long; Btataamy. Storer; Day v. Croft. Bkvore Mastbh-Sir G. Roses, Vincent v.

Watt; Gilpin v. MageB; Boyes v. Boyes Seweil v. Murray. Before Master Richards.

Wallace v. Sarel; ReE. Cumming; v. Hawkes; Jones v. Lewis; Anger v.

Watson; Re Lane's Trust; Brown v. PuttoeW; Notley v. Palmer. Before Master Tinhet. At It: Sheldon v.

Sheldon; fehelley v. Ellis Davis v. Barrett. At 1 24 Kennedy v. Glover Abbott v.

Sworder; Pauletv, Jai'kson Lechmere v. Stubbs. Beeork Master Bwjkt. At Leeds v. Leeds; Collins v.

Wood. At 12 Howard v. Howard; Capper v. Mills. At 1 Foiey v.

Smith Ecoles v. Cheyne. At 2 Ro Hoosori'a Trust; Douse v. King; Crump v. Crump; (Before the Chief Clerk).

At 104 Gardner v. Williams. At Re Bedford Charity. Before Master Humphrv. Oldbury v.

Oldbury; Collar v. Sampson Sirdeiield v. Thackcr. At 11: Brassoy v. Brassey Devey v.Thornton.

At 12: Ro Hanley Curacy Peekv. Steptoc; Worsley lUdgwuy. At 1 Stahlschmt It v. Lett Banks v. Banks Jones v.

Maurice. At 2: Rayment v. Raj-moat; Dipple v. Stmrt. At 3: Roberts Henrdkcr White v.

Bloxam. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, WESTMINSTER. At 10, Sittings in Banco. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, WESTMINSTER. fendant was an attorney residing in Bedford-place, Russell-square.

The action was brought to recover compensation in damages for having invested the sum of belong tnus coincidinp; an opinion exDressed bv the Uourt ot Uom on to relate, wish a reeling ot great satistaction, the mon Pleas, and differing from" a decision of the Court of tne estate snouw oe reconveyea to tne testator, his heirs, appointees, and assigns. After the date of the will, before the testator's death, the mortgage money was paid off and the property was reconveyed searches which have recently taken place by the police in private houses, and apparently to the con Exchequer. Retirement, oe Mr. Jostice Patteson. Gassiott had claimed a lien on certain wines which he had sold the bankrupt, but on which ho had afterwards obtained security and that the assignees, after cxaraininir Mr.

Gassiott and other witnessesat a private meeting, were content to admit that the lien was a good one. The balance-sheet showed that the assets would produce nearly to the testator to the ordinary uses to bar dower. It having been intimated that an address to Mr. Justice Pattoson would be made by the Attorney-General, on the ing to tne ptamtin, so negligent ana careless a manner, that both the interest and principal had been lost. Such a loss was very serious to the plaintiff, inasmuch as besides the interest which she had received from a former investment of her 3502., and a Bmall pension, she had no means of maintaining herself and her, two children.

The first investment which had been made of the 3502. was by lending it to a gentleman who had granted an annuity for the loan and paid 8 per cent, interest. Mr. Pelichet died in the month of June, 1844, and some time after his It also appeared that the testator before the date of his will had purchased other property at an auction without any part of the bar, on this, the last occasion of his occupying a seat on the bench, at ah early hour there was a large written contract, ana mis property was atterwarus conveyed to him to uses to bar dower The teBtator died in 1821 zus. in the pound; and he hoped that the opinion which his Honour had expressed at a former meeting, would lead to an arrangement under which some plan for realising tha stock might be adopted the young men, tho bankrupt's sons, might be saved from ruin and the creditors mirfit ant.

1K rH 19a in the assembly of barristers, and later in the day of a great number of strangers, among whom were several of the family of the learned judge. Mr. Hawkins said he believed the assignees would not resist Mr. Gassiott's lien and nobody would be more hanpv than they if Mr. Gale's statement were borne out, as to tha creditors getting 20s.

iu the pound. decease the party who Vad borrowed the money intended to repay it, which he accordingly did. The defendant then undertook to re-invest the 3502. for the plaintiff. It appeared Mr.

Loaden was acquainted with a Sir Gregory Lewin, a barrister, to whom he had advanced 1,0002. Sir Gregory afterwards applied to him for a further loan of 4002., and he then agreed to lend him the 3502. of the plaintiff at 5 per cent, interest, which he did iu March, 1845. This investment was effected without the consent or knowledge of the plaintiff. Subsequently the defendant informed her of it.

without re-publishing his will, and the question now raised was whether there was a revocation of the will with regard to the property mortgaged and the property conveyed after the date of the will. The Vice-Chancellor Baid the rule upon which the. court had always decided was that where an estate was re-vested in a testator after the date of the will with the same qualities which previously existed then there was no revocation, and fo also where there had been a contract for purchase of an estate which was conveyed to the testator in the terms of the contract, but if the estate was re-vested with different limitations, so that ia fact the testator became entitled to a different species of property, then it acted nsj revocation of the will. Various authorities had been cited to show that this was the rule, and although the judges had always expressed their disapprobation of such a rule they had acted upon it. His At the rising of the court, The Attorney-General said My lords, on behalf of my brethren of the bar may I crave permission to express a few words of regret to the learned judge who is about to quit this court.

Mr. Justice Patteson, I am charged by my brethrea of the bar to convey to you their common regret that they see you for the last time ou the bench, on which' for now 22 years, you have occupied a seat with infinite honour to yourself, and to the unbounded satisfaction of the profession. As we are about to lose you it will not perhaps be unbecoming in me to offer, nor unwelcome to you to receive, the expression of the sense of the entire profession, and told her that the securities which Sir Gregory Lewin had deposited with him consisted of a promissory note, twenty-two shares in the Sheffield and Retford Bank, which were stated to be worth 112. per share, and twelve quarter shares in the Manchester Ashton-under- Lyne and Sheffield Railway Company. In the spring of xne ounKxupt; passed.

In re Jearsad. This was the certificate meeting in the case of Jearrad, builder, of Oxford-street. The bankrupt owed 2,6722. to unsecured creditors, and 3 3152. to thos holding security: his assets were put down at 8702 tha property held by creditors at 1,3152.

Profits, 3 9812 -1; i tradf expenses, 4,1262. domestic ditto deficiency at the commencement of tiie account 3672. Mr. Rhodes, for the assignees, stated that it was not their intention to offer any opposition. Mr.

Lawrance stated that the bankrupt had succeeded to) his father's business, not a yery profitable one, which he found encumbered with a large amount of expenditure for annuities and other matters. Proceedings in chancery were going on with reference to some property of the bankrupt's wife and if these were successful, the c-tate would benefit to the amount of 2,0002. About 1,0002. of assets had already been realised. His Honour granted a certificate of the third class.

At special juries Ball v. Bettsj Doe dem.Thorne tne year ioo, tne piamtin came to tpwn, ana then tor the first time she heard that Sir Greaorv Lewin had died in v. leuuaui; costoos v. jvurtn ManorasMre Railway Company; Smith v. Longriiigo; Hancock Buusen; Gimblet v.

Gilbert the Honour had also the same dislike to the rule, but he felt himself constrained to follow it. In tho present case he thoughtwith regard to the mortgaged property that when it was reconveyed to the testator to usea to bar dower he had thereby acquired a different estate, and as to the purchased property he thought that also must follow the rule, and that the will being revoked as to both estates, they would go to the heir at law of the testator. younger; rarqunarv. wuiis. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, GUILDHALL.

tnat tue wgn ana sacrea autie3 ot tha jmeucial office were never more faithfully, more honourably, or more ably discharged than by you. Though we lose you, your memory will always linger in a place with which we are naturally accustomed to associate the recollection of many persons whom we have been accustomed to revere. Your memory will be cherished by us, not only on account of that vast learning by which we have all profited, but from the remembrance of vaur untirinfr love of iustice nud October, 1845, in insolvent circumstances, andjthat tho bank shares and the railway shares were utterly valueless as se' curities. With respect to tho bank shares it appeared that Sir Gregory owed the bank money when he died, and by the constitution of the bank, the bank was entitled to common iurlrs: Abrahams v. Walker? Thflnwa t.

Chambrc Bliss the younger v. Bliss; Priohardv.the Official Manager of the London and Birmingham. Extension Railway; Lawson v. Hinklev: Harland v- Dew: Sanrlprsmi siml nthpra Knnth clusion that the acts ot our government justiiy the proceedings of his The Duke of Coburg Gotha remains in Vienna, and is treated with all the honours due to his position and the ostensible object of his visit. He has been visited by all the members of the imperial family, and dines daily with the Emperor, whose guest fie seems to bo.

A guard of honour has been appointed him. The manufacturers are beginning to cry out sorely against the provisions of the new tariff which abolishes the old prohibitive system, and many of them have been obliged to dismiss a portion of their workmen, and to have the others only working short time. The trade, however, which seems to suffer most of all is that connected with objects of luxury and fashion, which will be henceforth almost all imported. The of the Inferior has just issued some very stringent orders providing for the periodical inundation of the Danube which usually takes place at the melting and descent of the ice blocks, and turns the suburbs of Vienna into a navigable lake. Last year the descent of the waters was so impetuous as to sweep away everything before it, and the damage caused to property was estimated at thou-sands of florins.

HESSE CASSEL. A scheme for the future government of the electorate of Hesse has just been jointly submitted to the Frankfort Diet by the representatives of Austria and Prussia. It is therein proposed to abolish the constitution of 1831, and to form a parliament in two chambers from the estates, before which the new constitution shall be laid for approval. Were not the Diet in the habit of disregarding the public law of Germany as tan as the occasion suits, the proposed 'measure could not be carried out without much difficulty. The final act of Vienna signed by the plenipotentiaries of all the German powers, declares (Art.

56) tiat constitutions which the Diet finds existing and working, cannot be interfered with by the central power, and can only be modified in the way prescribed in those constitutions themselves. HANOVER. Advices from Hanover state that a commission is about to undertake the revision of the organic laws. The communal law will first be dealt with, and afterwards the law regulating district representation. Keen tne snares ot any shareholder who was aiiaj uuutkwcn v.

Ayoey oturgis v. uuow roraage v. carter, Lndefcnded: Cuinery v. Grundy Aaron v. Cramond; Charlton v.

Watsou; Stephens v. Gaaeley; Angell v. Colvillo Thompson v. Clarke. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, WESTMINSTER.

their debt. As to the railway shares, it was discovered that they did not belong to Sir Gregory Lewin at all, but were the property of a Captain Herring-ham, who had lent them to Sir Gregory Lewin, and had been lent him to raise money upon. The defendant then assisted the plaintiff to lay her case before the late Mr. Sidebottom, a conveyancer. The ouinion which that eren- At 19.

Middlesex special juries: Frend v. Shepherd; Pelichett hatred of wrong, which caused in you such inflexibility of purpose in the honest discharge of your duties, and of that almost child-like guilelessness and kindness of nature, which has always caused us to doubt whether wo most revered the judge, or loved the man. You carry with you into retirement the respect, the -veneration, and the enduring affections of every member of thfe. profession. We regret that the consciousness of one infirmity, and the apprehension that it might interfere with the due discharge of your high functions has caused vou to withdraw from vour u-auen, pun neara; v.

iwitwisle Blythe V. Drake; Shepherd v. Hnglctou; Haddan Lancaster; Yeo v. Williams; tleman expressed was, that perhaps iu equity Mrs. Pelichet might be entitled to demand to have both the bank and BANKRUPTCY COURT, BASING HALL-STREET.

Before Mr. Commissioner Fonblanque. Certificate James Clark, Upwc.ll, miller, at 1. Examination William Nash, Noble, street, warehouseman, at 12. Audits: John M.

Wood, at George Small, at 12; Wuoli and Lyons, at 12 William Gibbs, at Walter railway shares, but he gave a most distinct opinion that Mrs. Pelichet was entitled to recover her 3502. from the defendant, for the negligent manner in which he had invested Office while yet in the possession of unimpaired vigour of Doay and mma. we nope ana pray tnat you may long be Aievy, ui, 1 1 3. INSOLVENT COURT, PORTUGAL-STREET.

At 11. Before the Chief Commissioner. Bail: nr. T. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

Yesterday. Sittings in Banco. At the sitting of the court several judgments, in cases which had been argued, were delivered by Lord Campbell. Those of most public interest were the following The Qceen v. Pollock.

Mr. Ramshay, Ex-Jddcie oi? THE LlVEKPOOL COTNTY CotJET. This was a rule to show cause why an information, in the nature of a quo warranto, should hot be granted, calling on Joseph Pollock, to show by what authority he exercised the office of judge of the County Court of Liverpool. The ground of the application was, that when Mr. Pollock was appointed, the office was not vacant, and that Mr-Ramshay, the former judge, had not been lawfully removed from it.

The question the court had to consider was whether on the affidavits which had been filed Mr. Ramshay was entitled to try the question of the legality of his removal by means of a quo warranto. The point turned on the construction of the 9 and 10 Vic. c. 95, s.

18, which enacted that the Lord Chancellor and where the district was in the county of Lancaster, the Chancellor of the Duchy should have power to remove a judge of the County Court for "inability" or "misbehaviour." By a formal instrument, under the hand of the Earl of Carlisle, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Mr. Ramshay Cousins. Final orders: Charles Orrah James G. Burton; Samuel W. Paskell; William Marshall.

Adjourned protection: W. Knight. Original protection: Henry Broome; Samuel Butcher; William Hendrick, Rule: George W. Dyson. At 10.

Before Mr. Commissioner Law. Petition for discharge Ebcnezer Hurtnall; John Brockbank; William Coleman; Georee EQUITY COURTS. Yesterday. Before the Master of the Rolls.

Edwaiids v. Edwards. The Master of the Rolls save iudament in rtiis the money. In consequence of the defendant not coming to any satisfactory terms, the present action was brought. Evidence was then called in support of the plaintiff's case.

With respect to the Sheffield and Retford Bank shares, it appeared that when Sir Gregory Lewin died he owed the bank upwards of 3002. The bank had since failed, and there had been a call of 162. a shareJ when its affairs were wound up. Mr. Knowles then addressed the jury for the defendant, and contended that his client had not been guilty of any negligence in lending the money to Sir Gregory Lewin, who was a responsible man.

He lived in a substantial house in Harley-street, and kept a carriage and servants. Upon his marriage, his father, by a marriage settlement, settled 3002. a year upon him aud his wife. An uncle of Sir Gregory's had left him 10,0002., and the proceeds of his professional exertions had always been considerable, and in the year 1842 they had amounte'd to as much as 2,0002. Sir Gregory's life was insured for 13,0002., but at his deailh it was unfortunately found out that the policy was of no value, he having raiBed money upon it, and thereby forfeited it.

He submitted that tho defendant was not to blame because it had turned out that Sir Gregory died insolvent. He had lived in a manner calculated to deceive people, but that was no reason that it should be now said that the defendant had been guilty of great negligence in lending the plaintiff's money to him. The defendant himself had lent Sir Gregory 1,0002., for which, as security, Sir Gregory pledged his household furniture. Such was the confidence which the preserved that honourable retirement which you have so well earned and, with full hearts, we, one and all, bid you a respectful and affectionate farewell. Mr.

Justice Patteson said Mr Attorney-General and Gentlemen of tho Bar, I receive with proud satisfaction the kind and flattering address you have made to me. Of its entire sincerity I cannot have a doubt, and although I am painfully conscious that what you have said of my conduct on the bench is very far beyond what I deserve, yet I will not be guilty of the affectation of denying that, coming as it does from so enlightened a body of gentlemen, it can be wholly undeserved. At least, it shows that if a public man, without being pre-eminent for ability, exerts those faculties which God has given him honestly and industriously, he will be sure to receive the mead of public approbation. I thank God that I have done so. I regret that while still in the possession of much bodily and mental power I am compelled to retire from a profession in which I have always delighted.

An infirmity under which I have long laboured renders imperative on me to do so. It is not now for the first time that I have contemplated such a step, but I have had on the one side to guard myself against a premature retirement while still in the possession of mental and bodily health, and on the other hand against clinging to office when by reason of my infirmity I ran the risk of perilling the ends of justice. I have endeavoured to avoid either extreme, but I vtt fear I have deferred that step too lone. which arose on the construction of the will of William Edwards, who died, leaving a. son and two daughters, and who, by his will, devised his real nronertv to his widow for life with remainder to the children, with a provision that if any of the children hould die without issue, the share of such child sl.ould be divided between the other two.

The son INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT. Yesieedat. Befock the Chief Commwioni-k. In the Mattek of Richard Kxigiit. This insolvent, who had been a stationer, carrying on an extensive business in Queen-street, Cheapsidc appeared for further examination.

Mr. Bagley opposed on the part of the Union Bank, and Mr. Macrae also opposed for creditors Mr. Cooke and Mr. Sargood supported.

Iu this ease the debts were large, aud the insolvent alleged that there were large sums owing to him. His insolvency was attributed to City improvements, whereby he had to remove from Budge-row to Queen street, and lost a ready money trade. Since the former hearing on Friday an account had been prepared. Mr. Bagley now asked for time to examine the account prepared; and Mr.

Macrae required other accounts, according, he said, to the rules of the court. Mr. Cooke resisted an adjournment, and contended that the insolvent had filed proper accounts. Secina that the creditors had made the insolvent within the few days a bankrupt, and that the case was transferred to the other court, there was no benefit to be gained by requiring other accounts. Counsel for the opposition said the ease, by the bankruptcy, had assumed another aspect.

It would, however, be better to adjourn the case for the present, and Mr. Bagley said it would be seen whether the proceeding had been got up ou the part of the insolvent. His point 'of opposition was that the insolvent had given preferences, and until now he had not heard of the bankruptcy. The insolvent denied that he had anything to do with the bankruptcy. He was served with a notice of baak-ruptcy on Friday lost.

Mr. Cooke claimed the adjudication of this court. All the property was transferred to the Court of bankruptcy, and in that court the creditors couldepposc. Mr. Bagley hoped the court would adjourn the case, in order to see whether the adjudication iu bankruptcy was annulled or confirmed.

If the case was adjudicated upon in this court, and the adjudication in mkruptcy was annulled, the creditors would have great cause of complaint. The Chief Commissioner acquiesced ia an adjournment for a week, in order to ascertain whether the bankruptcy was The case was adjourned to Tuesday, and tho bail enlarged. In be John Willis hue. This insolvent, a baker, was opposed by Mr. Dowse, and supported by Mr.

Nichols. The. point in this case was a friendly arrest. The detain BELGIUM. was removed from the office of judge of the County Court of Liverpool for inability and misbehaviour." M.

Quinette, late minister of France at the court of Belgium, took leave of the King on Sunday last. The court was of opinion that that instrument was not necessarilr whollv conclusive, nnd that thp Dhan- survived ais mother, but died afterwards without issue, and the point in the case was, whether the devise to him was absolute, or whether, iu the event that occurred, his share went to the daughters. His Honour said.he was of opinion that the son, on surviving his mother, the tenant for life, took an absolute vested interest in the property of the testator, not liable to be divested on his afterwards dying, without leaving a child surviving him. cellor of the Duchy of Lancaster was under the authority of the case of Rex v. Warren," subject to the control of On the same day his successor, M.

de Bassano, had an audience to deliver his credentials. He was conducted to the palace by one of the King's aides-decamp, and in a royal carriage; The King has con tnis court wno might inquire into the cause and manner of a motion. The court did not expect that the instrument of removal should set out all the causes of removal or the evidehco by which it was supported, and this instrument ferred upon M. Quinette the grand cordon of his order. defendant had in Sir Gregory Lewin that he allowed ano- I have for years been compelled to use very ingenious instruments which have materially assisted me, and which tnerperson ot wnom ne haa borrowed duoi.

to have a prior charge Upon the furniture, and took a second charge upon t. it. Before Sib James Paekeb. Ex parte Gay, Ex taute Hopxinson. In the Matter of the "Winding-up Acts, and of the London and Bikmingham Extension, and Wglver.

HAMPTON, DAVENTKY, AND LEAMINGTON AND WARWICK Railway Company. ucu tuc luiuiiuie waa auiu, uiixu individual received his 5002., and the defendant got only 4002. With resnect These were two motions made bv leave bv contributories are indeed great comforts to any one afflicted with deafness, either in public places or in private seciety, but they were not sufficient to prevent tho increase of my infirmity and of this I am sure that nothine but the increasing kindness of the bar, and. their exertions on my behalf, and the ready support I have ever received from my brethrea on the bench, would have enabled me to continue to perform the duties of my office so long as I have. I am aware that on some occasions, and I fear they have been many, I have given way to complaints and irritatiBn towards the bar and of the company that two orders made by the Master in the course of the winding up the affairs of the company might be discharged or varied.

By these orders the Master had directed that Mr. William Bromlev Vritchard. a civil en SWITZERLAND. The New Gazette of Zurich, of the 6th, says "We understand that the printer of the Tribune of Berne, a Frenchman named Michel, whose papers were not en regie, has been expelled by an order of the federal council. His wife was also ordered to accompany him.

The Swiss journals announce that on the proposition of a citizen of Geneva, Colonel Rilliet, a subscription is to be got up in all the cantons to pay the sum of still remaining due by the cantons of the Sonderbund for tho military operations in 1846-7. to the 3502., the defendant urged upon the plaintiff to put it in the funds, but she would not listen to that proposal, and wished to have the money laid out in such a way as to get more interest than the funds produced; With respect to the bank shares and the railway shares deposited by Sir Gregory Lewin, when he borrowed the 3502., the defendant had every reason to believe that they were good securities. He (Mr. Knowles) therefore submitted that his client had been guilty of no negligence in investing the money of the plaintiff. being drawn up in the words of the act, they were to presume that the Chancellor of the Duchy had exercised his jurisdiction properly until the contrary was shown.

But they still thought that it was open to Mr. 'Ramshay to show that he was removed on improper evidence, or that the complaints against him were not such as to disqualify him, or that his conduct did not amount to inability or misbehaviour" under the act. On such affidavits the court would grant a rule to show cause for a quo warranto, with a view to his restoration to his office. The court was to see that judges and other functionaries did not exceed their authority. The Chancellor of the Duchy could only remove a judge after hearing the party accused, nor could he act without hearing evidence, nor had he any authority to remove when the causes shown did not nmount to "inability or misbehaviour." When, however, the party had had a fair hearing, when the charges were "inability and misbehaviour," and evidence had been hoard, the court could not inquire into the truth of the charaes or the gineer, should bring an action at law against Mr.

Henry towaras witnesses, as it they were to blame, when mv dim- vyrusuiii, uie ujtucuu manager ui me company, lor worK and labour, upon the employment of the general committee of management of the comnanv. wherebv certain admis culty arose only from my own defect. I have been and am sincerely sorry that I have not exercised such command over myself as I should. I have striven against the sions made by tho official manager under the direction of mr. iioaaer was tnen caneu, out his examination was ing creditor now attended, and admitted that it was a not concluded when the court rose.

repetition ot such, conduct, but 1 am alraitt not always successfully. My brethren on the bench, tne Master were to oe read in evidence on tho trial, and whereby it was further ordered that the official manager should be at liberty to consent on the trial of the action you ana the public have always been kind and induleent to EXCHEQUER CHAMBER. Yesterday. Sittings in Ceown Cases llEKaVEi. Before Lord Chirp that a verdict bo entered for Mr.

Pritchard, subject to a reference to a barrister to be agreed upon. tics Jsbvis, Me. Baiion Parke, Ub. BiRON Audehson, Ma. Barom amount of evidence produced, for of this the Chancellor of the Duchy was constituted the judge.

Looking to the affidavits in the present case, it appeared to the court that they mcnuiy arrest. Ihe insolvent owed him the money for which he had arrested him. Mr. Dowse asked hfm whether there was an arrangement to pay the debt The creditor said there was not he supposed he should lose it. His Honour sustained the petition, aud the insolvent was discharged.

THE POLICE COURTS. me in this respect, and a grateful recollection of that kindness will always remain with me. I now most affectionately bid you farewell. I wish you all many years of health and happiness, of success and honours in your liberal profession, the duties of which have ever been performed, not only with zeal and ability, but with honour and integrity, which has eminently conduced to the preservation of the just prerogatives of the crown and the happiness of the people. JAEGIXA V.

WILLIAM ION. The prisoner in this case had been tried before the Recorder at the Central Criminal Court, on a charee of lit ter SWEDEN. The powder magazine at Loudden, near Liding-obro, exploded on the 24th. The shock shattered several thousand panes of glass in the city of Stockholm, particularly in tho Palace. The magazine contained 2,800 cwt.

of gunpowder, and the loss is estimated at 115,000 thtilers. Two bodies only have been found among tho rains. ing a forged receipt for poor-rates, such receipt having been ine learned Judge then shook hands with his learned Mr. Stuart, Mr. Hugh Hill, and Mr.

Cole, in support of Mr. Gay's motion, submitted that the Master had no authority to direct admissions and a reference to arbitration to be made by tho official manager, and they referred to the Winding-up Act, 1848, sections 50 and 67. Mr. Daniel and Mr. W.

Morris, in support of the motion by Mr. Hopkinson and another contributory, made similar objections. Mr. Cooper and Mr. Swift were for the official manager.

The Vice-Chancellor varied the order of the Master, by adding thereto that the judgment, if any, was not to be dealt with except by leave of tho court. Mr. Pritchard's costs to be in the discretion of the Master. The costs of the other parties to come out of the estate. brethren on the bench, and, bowing to the audience in the court, retired amid loud manifestations of applause.

piaueu uy iiim witi nanus ui a money lender, to convince him that he (Ion) was a respectable person. The Lord Chief Justice said that their lordships had proposed to give judgment in this case to-day, but that they required further time to arrive at their decision, and it must therefore be again postponed. were umuxuuieiu ui reuui uie; pretmiiipuon mac ine proceedings were regular. The affidavits asserted that the conduct of Mr. Ramshay was unimpeachable, and justified his proceedings where it was asserted he had been wrong, as in the case of the committal of the editor of a newspaper for contempt of court.

The court could not say that there were not grave charges against Mr. Ramshay, or that he had not received notice of an inquiry, or that he had not a fair hearing, or that evidence had not been received. It was consistent with the allegations in tho affidavits that the proceedings may have been regular, and the evidence sufficient to support the charges. It was said that on the just construction of the act the court was bound to grant a quo warranto in order that tho real merits of the case Srrmas at Nisi Peios, Before Mb. Justice Eeleanb a Steciai.

Jury. The Queen v. Major. Indictment por Perjury. This was an indictment brought against the defendant, the son of a medical gentleman at Hungerford, Berkshire, by his brother.

It was stated that the defendant was a trustee GREECE. ATHENS, Jau. 27. In its sitting of the 26th the Senate rejected by 87 against 14 votes the bill for authorising a subvention of 36,000 drachmas in favour of the family of M. G.

Coundouriotis. The Minister of Finance has presented to the Chamber a declaratory bill upon the claims against the Treasury of those of taxes who were compelled to deliver up large portions of their funds to the officers of the for some ladies called Atkinson, who were mortgagees of MANSION-HOUSE. John Vivian was brought before Alderman Cubitt, charged with having stolen a great number of outsidecoats belonging to gentlemen connected with the Stock Exchange. Sir Robert W. Carden requested to be permitted to say a few words upon the subject of the numerous robberies which had lately been committed in the Stock Exchange, and in the perpetration of which it appeared the prisoner had been concerned.

For a considerable period members of the house had missed their great coats from the places in which it was their custom to deposit, them, and the committee had in vain made inquiries into tin? matter. Hay-don and Huggitt, two very active detective officers of the City, had been employed to watch those who walked in and out of the building, and for some time the suspicion was might be inquired into. But the court was of opinion that when the Chancellor of the Duchy certain property, ana who had deposited tne deeds with him for safety that iu the month of February, 1839, he was distressed for money, when he deposited the trust deeds CONSISTORY COURT. Yesterday. Before Dr.

Lushington. Hawkins v. Hawkins. This was a suit for separation by reason of adultery, brought by the husband against the wife. The facts were not entered into as there was no opposition, and the Court therefore at once pronounced its sentence.

Theodore v. Theodore. In this case the deceased, Mr. John Theodore, died on the 28th June, 1851, in the Fulham-road, having executed a had acted properly in the discharge of the duty of with a certain Sealy, the keeper of a public-house at his office, in inquiring into charges of inability and mis Before VrcE-CnANCEixoit Sih G. Tgeneb.

The Lped Wahden oe Dover v. South Eastern Railway Company. This was a motion to restrain the defendants from using, or allowing to be used, the building erected on land purchased by them from the any other than the purposes of the railway and particularly from using, or allowing the same, or any part of it, to be used, for the examination of passengers' luggage, or in any manner as or for a custom house, and also, in particular, from using, or allow Wmtechapei, lor either alone or with a man behaviour," and heard evidence on those charges the legislature intended that his decision, removing the iudne. called Harlington. He also gave him (Sealy) a document which stated that he (Major) had deposited the title deeds unpaid army during the confusion which' followed the death of Capo d'Istria.

The government wishes should be final and conclusive. Much stress had been laid relating to an estate called Albert Uottage, at wotananam. on the hardship of an enactment, by which the removal of will dated the 29th September, 1850. The property left to niaKe tneni legal, out not recoverable. Berks, into the hands of Sealy, who had given him a memorandum to that effect, and that he (Sealy) was to keep them till the sum of was paid him.

On this document the chief assignment for periury was framed. In a juage couia De so enectea out wnen tne court had arrived at the meaning of the legislature in an act of parliament, that was all they had to do aad it was not for them was estimated at I ha present suit was brought by the widow, who was appointed sole executrix under the will, against a nephew, who would have taken a more extended interest under a former will. 1843 a suit was instituted in the Ecclesiastical Court in re to decide on the policy ot such an enactment. The court was not, however, of opinion that the legislature intended that such ft jurisdiction as this should be exercised entirely Dr. Addams appeared for the nephew.

Dr. Harding appeared in support of the will before the LATEST FOREIGN EXCHANGES. Madrid, Three per 37 37J Bolsa, 37. New Three per 18j': spect of certain testamentary papers of Miss Robinson, deceased, and at that suit the defendant said he had written after court. without appeal.

There must be a power somewhere of re after The learned Judge stopped tho learned counsel YDr. ing to be used, any part of the building as lodging or sleeping rooms, or for any purposes connected with the business of an innkeeper and also to restrain the defendants from permitting the building to remain in its present form, or in any form not approved of by the plaintiff's surveyor. Tho case was commenced en Monday. Mr. Eolt, Mr.

Baily, and Mr. Renshaw, appeared for the plaintiff, and it appeared by the affidavits that the company being desirous of continuing their line into the town of Dover, and down te the harbour, and their scheme being opposed by the Lord Warden and assistants, an agreement was entered into between them, by which the plaintiffs agreed to sell them a piece of land for a station, upon condition that Bolsa, 18. Coupons, 91 after Bolsa, 9. Passives, Harding) and said, the full capacity of the testator had moving Uounty Uourt judges, it could hardly be by means of an address to the crown by both houses of parliament, as in the case of the judges of the superior courts but was it contemplated by the legislature that an appeal to the jury should be resorted to With all respect for iurios. not been impugned, while the execution, of the instrument was miiy substantiated, oomc trilling discrepancies in the evidence could not invalidate such proof, and the court must therefore pronounce in favour of the will.

It would make no order as to costs. it was possible that the legislature might have have thought lava tne jjora unanceuor, or tne unancelior ot tue Duchy of Lancaster, were quite as competent as they were, after very uncertain, itmn about five week" it was ascertained that 17 or 18 coats. had disappeared, notwithstanding the vigilance of the beadles at the several entrances. At last a person followed the prisoner, who had been observed aboutthe avenues to the Stock Exchange, took him into custody, and found in his possession a great number of duplicates, which soon showed that he had been industrious iu appropriating the clothes of the members. It had been suspected that the robberies had been committed by some individuals who had access to the house in consequence of their connexion with some of the but it wasvery satisfactory to know that the prisoner was not in the office of any stock-broker, and had nothing to do witli the building.

The prisoner, after the evidence given by the officers, was remanded till Monday next, when cases against him will be investigated. He confessed that he hud stoleu a number of the coats. BOW-STREET. Cfiarlcs Nash, formerly a railway parli-unentary agent, was brought up on remand, charged with I'm fling the signature of Mr. Peter Hanystocke, of Wickiuw, Ii.land, farmer, to a transfer of 195 shares in the Dublin and Wick-low Kailway Company, and-further, with feloniously transferring ten shares in the same comnanv, the property of Mr.

Michael Kenny, of Dublin, The main evidence for the prosecution having been ready heard, there was now received only the evidence of Il.inytocke's father, who proved that he saw his son on the rStii May last (as deposed! sign a paper connected with hi shaves, at 5 after Bolsa, Bank of St Ferdinand, 103 c. Exchange on London, 50.85. Berlin, Feb. 7. Voluntary Loan, I02h; ditto, Four-and-a-Half per Cent.

(1800), 101 ditto (1852), 101 National Debt, 89; Commercial Marine, Bank Shares, 98. Vienna, Feb. 6. Five per Cent. Metalliques, 94.

New Loan (Series A), ditto (Series" B), Four-and-a-Half per Cent, ditto, 84. Bank Shares, 1,224. Exchange on London, 12.16. tne nearmg ot evidence, to decide on the conduct of PREROGATIVE COURT. Yesierdat.

Befoeb Dn. Lushingtoh. County Court ludge. If. on the removal of a Bannatyne and Bannatyne v.

Bannatyne and signed 'he memorandum before referred to. Proceedings were afterwards commenced in the Court of Chancery, when 7 bills, 19 answers, and 2 demurrers were filed. In the course of these proceedings, defendant made an affidavit, sworn on Jan. 7, 1851, in which he denied having written or signed tho memorandum, and stated that his handwriting had been feigned by Harlington, he believed. He also denied that he had deposited the deeds with Sealy.

1 he handwriting to the document was sworn to be the defendant's by documentary and other evidence. Mr. James then addressed the jury, urging that the defendant was not actuated by a corrupt motive. John Sealy was sworn, and said In 1839 I was a publican. Harlington owed me a great deal of money a public-house score and money lent.

He came in a chaise from Wokingham and brought some deeds in a bag, which I afterwards delivered to Messrs. Wire and Childs, my solicitors. Defendant was not there then. I did not give up the deeds because Harlington owed me money. This occurred before the 25th of July, 1839.

Cross-examined I am agent for a brewer at Sherborne now. He will not let me be any other business. The handwriting of 'mv name to the attestation of this deed judge of a County Court, after an inquiry, the appointment of his successor might be questioned by means of a quo OTHERS. The arguments ia this case were resumed to-day, but uuu j.iul wueu tuu lytti'uuu. judge rase.

warranto on any case supported by athdavits, it would he doubtful whether all the proceedings before such successor might become coram non judice" for months, and such a state of things might be even prolonged for years by motions for the hearing of new trinls. It might also haouen no part ol the building should be used lor any purpose except such as was connected with the railway, and that the building itself should be built, as to its, external elevation, upon a plan to.be approved of by their surveyor. This agreement was afterwards embodied in an act of parliament (6 7 cap. 51). A plan was then submitted to the plaintiff 's surveyor and approved of, one of the provisions of the plan being that the height of the building should not exceed forty feet.

The company subsequently purchased an adjoining piece of land from the plaintiffs, for the purpose of building an hotel and this hotel hnd been'built, but the station was not finished till last September. The plaintiffs now complained that the defendants had exceeded the elevation allowed by the plan to the amount of six feet. That they used a part of the lower floor of the building for the purpose of Custom-house officers examining the baggage of travellers, and that the upper floor was converted into forty or fifty bed-rooms, to be used in connexion with tho hotel. to nis successor that, having pertormecl his duties with ability and integrity, ho might be called on to refund his salary, besides being liable to actions bv parties to suits COURT OF BANKRUPTCY. Yesterday.

Bepoee Mr. Commissioner Holbovd. In be Westley. The bankrupt was a bookbinder, of Playhduse-yard. This was the last examination meeting but the accounts, which are very voluminous, and are in course of preparation by Messrs.

Harding and Pullein, of Guildhall-chain- against whom judgment had been given and executions issued. The court must look to the language of the legislature, and this was that it should be lawful for the Lord Chancellor or the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to by the elder Major is very like my own, but I will not swear one way or the other, I never saw Major, sen. I don't remember Harlington's giving me a memorandum of the deposit, but he might have done so. He absconded. I have made two affidavits, but I did not know tho date of ine Vice-(JhauceHor intimated that he could not interfere by injunction on the ground of the building preceding by six feet the prescribed height: that might be ground for compensation in damages.

Mr. Roundell Palmer and Mr. Simpson appeared for the Ders, nave not yet been hied. Mr. Murray, representing a creditor, asked the bankrupt the reason why his accounts were not ready.

The bankrupt said that one reason was, that he had not been able to attend, partly through illness, neither had he the funds necessary to pay the accountants. Mr. Lawrance, who appeared for tho bankrupt, said he had been incapacitated for some time from attending to his accounts by proceedings which had been taken against him elsewhere he had also been suffering from ill health, as was shown by a medical certificate. The accounts would be filed that day, without the accountants claiming a lien on them, although a great amount of labour had been employed in preparing them. Mr.

Pullein. one of the accountants, said the delay was this document when I did so, 1 may have seen defendant write, but I don't think I know his handwriting. Major and Harlington were often at my house in 1839. I never lent defendant money, and I never advanced any money on the deeds. The first night I saw them they borrowed Collision on the Manchester, Sheffield, and IincolnsiUke Railway.

On Saturday evening an accident, accompanied with groat destruction of property, or-euvred near the Wortley station, on the Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway. The goods train from Lincoln to Manchester arrived at the Pcnistono station about six o'clock. There boing-a passenger train from Sheffield then due, preparations were made lor shunting the foods train on the down line until tho other had passed. Twenty-scvou of the trucks had been moved on the down lino when the coupling chains broke, and the wapraons started back in the direction of Sheffield, Tho engine, with the remaiudcr of the train, followed in pursuit; hut the impetus which the runaway trucks acquired in descending the incline propelled them lorTnrd nta f. urful speed.

At Wortley station, about six miles distant the Manchester pick-up train was standing on the down llno The wag detaohe(1 and the guard i0t- ongagea in picking up soml carriages at an adjoining siding. The runaway waggons came portion of the trucks which st inntac't were" completely smashed, whilst such as escaped were pflcci upon each other, forming a barricade of moit inmffl The appearance of the lino, im.iu,lhtcaVCrrtoe1ac dent-was most singular. For some distance on cither side thi rails were covered with flour and bran, which lay a foot deen on the ground. In addition to this there wcro the fragments of broken waffoons, which lav thicklv strewn the request of Mr. Nash, to whom he handed the paper so signed.

The witness knew nothing of the nature of the paper. The shares had been transferred to bi5 son by dpt. Owen, the agent of Lord Courtown, who is this witness's landlord, for a farm of forty-nine acres. There was nothing whatever paid to his son for the shares. Calls had been paid on them by Captain Owen, and another call was now made.

Mr. Peter Kelly admitted the signature shown him, 'nut said, when he signed, he thought it was a pr.ixy paper. Mr. Keane, barrister, for the prisoner, insisted that the witnesses knew what they were signing, and alleged that the prosecution was got up by the directors, with whom. Mr.

Nash, who was a large shareholder, had been long at litigation. The shares were of no value, and the parties wished to get rid of them. Fully committed. MARYLEBONE. Joseph Mussehohite was brought up for re-examination on the charge of having stolen a mare pony, the property of Mr.

John Buckncll, a cheesemonger, residing iaWUliaiu-street, Manchester-square. ueienuants, ana contended tnat tne use by the Customhouse officers was, in fact, a use connected with the rail Zl. from me. They owed me 1351, I don't know I ever said they owed me 'MQl. They lived in my house as gentlemen, I finding the money, till I discovered that Harline- way, and was a great accommodation to the public, and that the bed-rooms were only intended to be used for-pas-Bengers arriving by the packets whtn they could not find accommodation elsewhere that they were as much connected with the railway as refreshment rooms, and it could ton had no interest in the deeds.

There is no notice of my receiving the bag of deeds in my diary. remove a judge of a County Court for inability or misbehaviour. The natural construction of this language was that those functionaries might remove without appeal, for inability or misbehaviour," of which they were constituted the judges. No appeal had been expn ssly given, and for the court now to create such an appeal would be to assume the functions of legislation, and not confine themselves to the construction of acts of parliament. Sir F.

Kelly, in moving for the rule, relied on the case of the Queen v. Owen;" but that was no authority in this instance, for it was the case of tho removal of the clerk of a County Court for "inability and misbehaviour," when it was shown that his only "inability was his not being able to pay his debts. Ho also relied on a class of cases which related to the removal of parish.clerks by incumbents but supposing that the Lord Chancellor or the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster had only the power of removal possessed by incumbents, yet no case had beeu cited of the restoration of a parish clerk removed by an incumbent after inquiry, of which notice had been given, and in which evidence had been heard. The case of "Rex v. Warren" was not to that effect.

Lnrd Mansfield there used an expression which the court now adopted, "That no such removal could take place without the parties being subject to the control of this court;" but at the same time they did not think that they not be argued that the company would not have been not at all owing to their charges not being paid, but solely to the amount of labour which it was necessary to bestow on these voluminous accounts. Mr. Linklater, for the assignees, asked for an adjourn Re-examined Harlington wrote a flowing hand, and used to boast of being able to write different hands. Mr. Serjeant Byles then replied, and Mr.

Justice Erie having summed up, The jury returned a verdict of Guilty. justified in allowing part of the building to be used as a re freshment room for passengers. Mr. Kolt replied. ment sine die but his Honour directed an adjournment ou the same terms as the preceding one.

In be Meane and Means. The "Vice-Chancellor said that he had fully considered the case, and wished to add to what he said the "dav before unon COURT OF EXCHEQUER. Yesterday. Sittikos in Banco. Bbfoeb Ms.

Baron Parkb, Ma. Babon ALnEtisoN, Mb. Bauon Piatt, and Mk. Bawn Mabtin. Cleave v.

Jones. Professional Confidence. This was a case tried at Hereford before Mr. Justice some particulars ot what previously transpireti peared, and it will be remembered "that the prisoner was sent on Friday week last to Smithfield with the pony, directions being at the same time given to him to wait there until the arrival of the He huwever thought bc to dispose of the animal for and did not return to prose- Both lines were completely blocked up by the accident ami 1 1 ,1 1 n51 1 tho lirst point, that he did not mean to say that if a building was erected contrary to tho provisions of an act of parlia-I mem, tho court would not iu any cose restrain the party from I using it. But the difference betweeu the height of 40 feet Tho bankrupts were brewers, at Brighton.

This was the meeting for the last examination. One of the partners, Jacob Meane, having died i-ince the bankruptcy, the accounts had been prepared by tho surviving partner, William Meane. They extended over three and a half years prior JSrle, aud involved a somewhat novel point. The plaintiff.

Get access to Newspapers.com

  • The largest online newspaper archive
  • 300+ newspapers from the 1700's - 2000's
  • Millions of additional pages added every month

About Daily News Archive

Pages Available:
137,987
Years Available:
1846-1900