tics Building Society, No. 3. Birmingham, March 12, 1858. Two months after demand in writing we promise to pay to T. P. one hundred pounds with interest, &c., for value received. W. H. and J. T., trustees. W. F., secretary.-Held, that the parties who signed the note were personally liable upon it, and that the right of the holder to sue them was not affected by the 6 & 7 Wm. 4, c. 32, and the 10 Geo. 4, c. 56, s. 21. Price v. Taylor, 540 PUBLIC SERVICE. See EVIDENCE, (1). PUIS DARREIN CONTINUANCE. See PLEA. RAILWAY CLAUSES CONSO- RAILWAY COMPANY. (1) Contract for Carriage of Fish Subject to Conditions-Reasonableness of Conditions within the 17 & 18 Vict. c. 3, s. 7. A railway Company gave public notice that fish would only be conveyed on their line by special agreement and by particular trains; and that the sender should sign certain conditions, as follows:-"That the Company should not be responsible, under any circumstances, for loss of market, or for other loss or injury arising from delay or detention of trains, exposure to weather, stowage, or from any cause whatever, other than gross neglect or fraud:" and they notified" that fish, under spe cial conditions, would be conveyed by the 6.50 A.M., the 8.55 A.M, (and other named) trains, subject in all cases to the immediate convenience and arrangements of the Company." These conditions having been signed by a person sending fish by the railway:-Held, that they were just and reasonable conditions within the meaning of the 17 & 18 Vict. c. 31, s. 7, and that they constituted a valid contract binding upon the party who had signed them. Beal v. The South Devon Railway Company, 875 The plaintiff delivered to a railway Company eighteen packages to be carried on their line. He filled up and signed a receiving note, describing the goods as "furniture." On the paper, under the head "Conditions," were these words:-No claim for deficiency, damage or detention will be allowed, unless made within three days after the delivery of the goods; nor for loss, unless made within seven days of the time they should have been delivered; and that the Company will not be answerable for the loss or detention of any goods which may be untruly or incorrectly described in the receiving note." The plaintiff said, "he was told to sign the and paper, did so. He might have seen the word Conditions,' but he did not read them and did not know, and was not told what they were." One of the packages consisted of a sack of clothes, which was not delivered, but no claim was made until more than seven days from the time when the same should have been delivered. Held:-First, that there was nothing to rebut the presumption arising from the signature of the paper by the defendant that he understood that the contract was subject to the conditions. Secondly, that the conditions were just and reasonable within the meaning of the 17 & 18 Vict. c. 31, s. 7; and, therefore, that the Company had a defence to an action on the ground that the claim was not made within seven days, and that the bag of clothes was misdescribed. Quære, whether, under the 17 & 18 Vict. c. 31, s. 7, the decision of a Judge at Nisi Prius, as to the reasonableness of the conditions can be reviewed by the Court above, where leave for that purpose is not reserved. Per Pollock, C. B., that it can be so reviewed. Lewis v. The Great Western Railway Company, 867 The plaintiff sent some oxen to the Craven Arms Station of the Shrewsbury and Hereford railway to be carried to Birmingham. The railway from that station to Shrewsbury belongs to the Shrewsbury and Hereford Railway Company, and the railway from Shrewsbury to Birmingham belongs to the Great Western Railway Company. The plaintiff's drover signed a way-bill, which contained the following condition :-" For the convenience of the owner the Company will receive the charges payable to other Companies for conveyance of such cattle over their lines of railway, but the Company will not be subject to liability for any loss, delay, default, or damage arising on such other railway." One sum was charged for the carriage, which was to be paid at Birmingham. The oxen were placed in trucks belonging to the Great Western Railway Company, and on the arrival of the train at Wolverhampton it was found that the bottom of one of the trucks was broken, and one of the oxen dead and others injured. In an action (3). Liability for Damage by Fire occasioned by Sparks from Locomotive Engine. A railway Company authorized by the legislature to use locomotive engines, is not responsible for damage from fire occasioned by sparks emitted from an engine travelling on their railway, provided they have taken every precaution in their power and adopted every means which science can suggest to prevent injury; from fire, and are not guilty of negligence in the management of the engine.-So Held in the Exchequer Chamber (reversing the judgment of the Court of Exchequer). Vaughan v. The Taff Vale Railway Company, 679 (4). Liability of Company to repair Approaches to and Road over Bridge. By the "North Staffordshire Railway Act, 1847" (10 & 11 Vict. c. cviii.), with which is incorporated the Railway Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, it is enacted "that where the railway is proposed to cross the turnpike road leading from Newcastle-under-Lyne to Leek, the Company shall erect a proper and sufficient bridge constructed of bricks, stone, iron or other materials, so as to carry the said turnpike road over and across the railway, such bridge also to be constructed with parapet walls of brick, stone or other mate rials, of five feet in height, and of the | suant to the 78th section of the clear and open width of thirty-three Railway Clauses Consolidation Act, feet at the least between such para- 1845, of the owner's intention to pets; and that the said turnpike work the minerals under the railway, road shall be made and altered at has refused to make him compensathe expense of the Company, on both tion, is not entitled to the adjacent sides of such bridge, so that the sur- or subjacent support of the minerals ; face of the turnpike road shall when but the owner is entitled to get them, completed have one uniform incli- although the working them may nation on both sides not exceeding cause the surface to subside.-Held, one in thirty; and that so much of accordingly, in the Exchequer the said turnpike road as shall be Chamber (affirming the judgment of broken up or damaged for the pur- the Court of Exchequer), that where, poses of this Act shall be reinstated under such circumstances, the Comand made good with the same materials pany had given notice that the as the road is now composed of, and working of the mines would destroy the fences thereof, whenever neces- the support of the railway, the owner sary, reconstructed and put into com- of the minerals was entitled to replete order by the Company, and cover the compensation which had kept in repair for the space of twelve been assessed under the 78th seccalendar months after the making, tion. The Great Western Railway forming, and completing thereof." Company v. Fletcher, 689 Held: First, that under the 46th section of the Railway Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (without reference to the Special Act), the Company were bound, at all times, to keep in repair the approaches to and road over the bridge: per totam Curiam. Secondly, that their liability was not restricted by the Special Act to the period of twelve months from the completion of the works: per Pollock, C. B., and Watson B, Martin, B., dubitante. The Trustees of the Newcastle-under-Lyne and Leek Turnpike Roads. Appellants, and The North Staffordshire Railway Company, Respondents, 160 (5). Right to the support of minerals. A railway Company, which, by agreement with the owner, has purchased his land for the purpose of their railway, and taken a conveyance in the form prescribed by the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, and which, after notice, pur The Liverpool Library is an institution formed to provide a fund of literary instruction and entertainment, adapted to the various tastes of the proprietors among whom the books are to circulate. The property is held in 893 shares, the holders of which subscribe one guinea annually. Proprietors may assign their shares, which are saleable at about 91. a share. If the annual subscriptions are unpaid for a certain period fines become due; if unpaid for two years the shares may be forfeited. The proprietors may introduce strangers. The committee has power to dispose of the earlier copies of periodical works, which from the nature of their contents require to be renewed by later editions. It is not lawful to make any dividend, gift, division or bonus in money or otherwise unto or No between any of the members, and no such division is in fact made. newspapers are supplied to or intro RENT CHARGE. duced into the institution.-Held, Creation by way of use. Perpetuity. that the premises occupied by the society were exempt from rates under the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 36, s. 1; and, first, that the possible increase in the value of the shares did not deprive the society of the benefit of the enactment. Secondly, that the annual payments were voluntary, because the society could not enforce the payment of them. The 9 & 10 Vict. c. cxxvii. (local and personal, public); by ss. 151 to 154, empowers the council of the borough of Liverpool to make rates on every person occupying any house or land within the borough for certain purposes therein named. Section 155 provides that no person shall be rated in respect of any church, chapel, &c., "or in respect of any building used for the education of the poor exclusively."-Held, that this Act did not repeal the provisions of the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 36, s. 1, or affect the exemption from rates of a house occupied by a society, established for purposes of literature within the borough. The Liverpool Library Appellants, v. The Mayor &c. of Liverpool, Respondents, 526 REASONABLE AND PROBABLE CAUSE. See SEARCH WARRANT. REGULA GENERALIS. HILARY TERM, 1853, R. 12. See COSTS,(5). RENT. See LANDLORD AND TENANT, (1), (2), (3). LESSOR AND LESSEE, (1), (2). A., being mortgagee in fee simple of certain lands, and the equity of redemption in fee belonging to B., by indentures of lease aud release, dated October, 1838, between B. of the first part, A. of the second part, I. of the third part, and H. of the fourth part. B. did limit and appoint, and A. conveyed to H., and B. confirmed, the said lands, to have and to hold the same to H., his heirs and assigns, to the use of H., his heirs and assigns, for ever, subject to a proviso for redemption by B, his heirs &c., on payment of 5000/. Amongst other provisoes there was one, that if default should be made in payment of the 5000%, it should be lawful for H., his heirs and assigns, to sell. This deed contained a proviso for quiet enjoyment by B., until default; also the following :— "Provided always, and it is hereby expressly agreed agreed and declared between and by the parties hereto, that if at any time hereafter, when and so soon as H. and every other person claiming or to claim by, from, through or under him, shall, under or by virtue of any power or authority herein contained, enter into or upon or otherwise become possessed of the said premises, or any part thereof, the same shall from thenceforth be subjected and be charged to and with the payment to B. and his assigns of the annual sum of 40, and the same shall thenceforth be recovered or recoverable by distress or otherwise upon or out of the mortgaged premises." This conveyance was executed by A. and B., but not by H. Default having been made in payment, H. entered into possession for the purpose of exercis ing the power of sale, and by inden-, ture, dated in 1847, conveyed to T., who entered into possession of the lands and duly paid the 40%. rent.Held, by the Court of Exchequer Chamber (affirming the judgment of the Court of Exchequer): First, that the rent was well created by way of use. Secondly, that the rent-charge was not invalid as commencing at a period too remote, and so contravening the rule against perpetuities. Quere, whether the rule as to perpetuities applies to a case where the party who is to take is ascertained, and who can dispose of, release or alienate the estate limited to him. Gilbertson v. Richards, 453 RESTRAINT OF TRADE. See BOND. ROYALTY. Assignment of Letters Patent. Declaration, that on the 16th of March, 1858, an agreement was made between H. and the plaintiff, that a patent of the plaintiff's for an alloy should be assigned to H., H. paying to the plaintiff by way of royalty 1d. per pound for each pound of alloy made or used by him under the letters patent during the existence of the letters patent, the royalty to be accounted for every six months after the date of the letters patent or from making any of the alloy, with a covenant for further assurance by the plaintiff: that on the 13th of November, 1858, in pursuance of the agreement, and for the purpose of carrying out the terms thereof, by deed, made between the plaintiff and H., the letters patent were assigned to H., subject to the payment of the royalty upon every pound of alloy which should be manufactured by H. to be ascertained in manner therein mentioned, and H. covenanted to pay 1d. per pound for each pound of the alloy which he should muke or sell; that on the 17th of December, 1858, by agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant, the defendant, in consideration of 250l. to be paid on the 23rd instant, &c., agreed to purchase the right of the plaintiff "in an agreement entered into with H., dated March 14, 1858 (meaning the agreement hereinbefore set forth, to receive a royalty of 1d. per pound on the metal sold under the patent specified therein; the second instalment to be paid conditionally, &c., otherwise the 250l. to be paid on the 23rd proximo to be considered as full purchase money for the plaintiff's right in the aforesaid agreement." Breach: that defendant had not paid the 2501. The plea set out the deed of November 13th, which, reciting that the plaintiff had agreed to assign the patent to H., H. paying 1d. per pound on the alloy which he should manufacture and vend: it was witnessed that the plaintiff assigned to H., subjected to the payment of a royalty of 1d. per pound on every pound of alloy manufactured by him, to be ascertained in manner and at the times therein mentioned. And H. covenanted to pay a royalty of 1d. per pound on every pound of alloy which he should make and sell, to be paid quarterly, the first payment to be made on the quarterly day next after the vending of any of the alloy; and for the purpose of ascertaining the quantity sold, to keep an account of the quantity made and vended: provided that, if H. neglected to supply any person desirous of purchasing alloy, &c., it should be lawful for the plaintiff to manufac |