taken up and set down by the trains stopping at the end of such passage. They also hired two rooms in a public-house, erected at the entrance of such passage, and the same were used as a booking-office and waiting-place, in the same manner as the station-houses of the company were used. Held, by the Vice-Chancellor of England, that the act did not prohibit the company from taking up and setting down passengers at that place. Held, by Lord Cottenham, C., that, in this case, there being nothing of a parliamentary contract between the parties, the company were entitled to exercise the powers given by the act in any manner not therein prohibited; that the passage in question was not a road within the meaning of the 100th section; and that the house in question was not a station or waiting-place within the meaning of the 101st section. Lord Petre v. The Eastern Counties Railway Company, (3 Railway Cases, 367).]-The Eastern Counties Railway Act, sect. 7, enacted, "that no road, wharf, yard, engine, station, loading or unloading places, warehouse, toll-house, building, machine or machinery, nor other erection, should at any time or times thereafter be made or erected by the company on any part of the estate of the plaintiff, nor within one mile of certain mansion-houses therein mentioned." The company, however, without such consent, erected a platform, and made steps to the top of the embankment of the railway, and set down and took up passengers, and otherwise used the platform, &c. as a station, and commenced making a carriage-road from a certain lane to the top of the embankment. The plaintiff obtained an injunction restraining the company from using the station, platform, stairs, steps, carriageroad, and other works and erections for the purpose of communicating with the railway, or for the purpose of taking up or setting down passengers, and from stopping at or near the said station or the platform, for the purpose of taking up or setting down passengers or goods, and from establishing or using any other or further works, buildings, or erections upon either side of their railway at the place where the same was traversed by Stock-lane, and from making and using any road or way to communicate with the said railway at or near the same place, and within one mile of Ingatestone-hall, without the license and consent of the plaintiff.-The Vice-Chancellor of England, on motion to dissolve, decided that the whole injunction should be Cases. Construction of Meaning of the words "public station or other buildings." Construction of powers given to arch over streets for the purpose of building a station. continued until the defendants should remove the platform and stairs, and when that should have been done the injunction should be dissolved without further order, except as to the road; and the defendants were ordered to pay the costs. He also decided, that the company were not prevented by the words of the 7th section from stopping their engines when they pleased, and letting the passengers get out as they best could; that steps or a permanent ladder would come within the terms of the 7th section; and that a road, platform, and steps would collectively constitute a station. Gordon v. The Cheltenham and Great Western Union Railway Company, (5 Bear. 229; 2 Railway Cases, 800).]-A clause in a railway act enacted, "that it should not be lawful for the company to make or establish any public station, yards, wharfs, waiting, loading, or unloading places, warehouses, or other buildings and conveniences for the depositing, receiving, loading, or keeping any passengers or cattle, or any goods, articles, matters, or things, upon the estate of R. G., his heirs or assigns, or within fifty yards of the boundaries thereof, without the previous consent in writing of the said R. G., his heirs or assigns, for that purpose had and obtained." R. G. filed a bill to restrain the company from using an engine-house and other buildings erected by them within the prescribed limits:-Held, by the Master of the Rolls, on demurrer, that the word "public" did not necessarily override the whole sentence; and that, if it did, everything connected with the railway must be considered as for the public use; and the injunction was granted, but with liberty to use the erection as theretofore, the company giving their promise to erect no more, and to apply for a rehearing, or to prosecute an appeal to the House of Lords. Semble.-A party will not be precluded from relief by acquiescence in what he may be led to consider a mere temporary violation of his right, when no evidence is given of expense incurred by another party in consequence thereof. The Attorney-General v. The Eastern Counties Railway Company, (2 Railway Cases, 823; 10 M. & W. 263; 12 Law Journal, Ex., 106).] By a local act of Parliament, certain paving commissioners of the parish of C. were empowered to remove obstructions from houses and buildings abutting near any streets which, in their judgments, should obstruct the circulation of light or air, or be inconvenient to passen gers. An act of Parliament, establishing the Northern and Eastern Railway Company, empowered them to construct arches over the railway or other works, streets, &c., and, upon the railway or any lands adjoining or near thereto, to erect stations. By another act, amending the former, the company were empowered to provide a station and depot near the London terminus of the Eastern Counties Railway; and it was enacted, that all the "clauses, powers, provisions, directions, regulations," &c., contained in the former act, should apply to the purchase of land and buildings for the railway, and also for the station. It was also enacted, that nothing in that act should extend to prejudice, derogate from, &c., the privileges of any parish over which the said railroad should pass, under local acts of Parliament. The railway company having arched over a street in the parish of C. for the purpose of building a station, the Lord Chancellor directed a case to be drawn up for the opinion of the Court of Exchequer, as to the right of the company to execute these works; and their Lordships returned the following certificate to the Court of Chancery:"We are of opinion, that the Northern and Eastern Railway Company were entitled, if it was necessary or reasonably convenient for the construction of a station and proper warehouses, to construct and make coverings or buildings, by arches or otherwise, over the public streets mentioned in the said case, in like manner as they were entitled to do for the construction of the railway itself; and that by their last act of Parliament they were expressly authorised to construct such station and warehouses at or near High-street, Shoreditch." Cases. Construction of Stations. VI. Cases relating to the Construction of Temporary Bridges. The London and Birmingham Railway Company v. The Grand Junction Canal Company, (1 Railway Cases, 224).]-A company were empowered by an act of Parliament to do all works necessary and convenient for constructing a railway, and, among others, to cross canals and made embankments in the line; and in particular to cross a canal of which the defendants were proprietors, and to make an embankment over a valley near the same place. Subsequent clauses in the act restricted the company from doing anything which should Cases. Construction of Meaning of the words "public station or other buildings." Construction of powers given to arch over streets for the purpose of building a station. continued until the defendants should remove the platform and stairs, and when that should have been done the injunction should be dissolved without further order, except as to the road; and the defendants were ordered to pay the costs. He also decided, that the compan were not prevented by the words of the 7th section from stopping the engines when they pleased, and letting the passengers get out as th best could; that steps or a permanent ladder would come within t terms of the 7th section; and that a road, platform, and steps wo collectively constitute a station. Gordon v. The Cheltenham and Great Western Union Rai1 Semble.-A party will not be precluded from relief by The Attorney-General v. The Eastern Counties Ra (2 Railway Cases, 823; 10 M. & W. 263; 12 Law Jon By a local act of Parliament, certain paving com parish of C. were empowered to remove obstructions buildings abutting near any streets which, in their j obstruct the circulation of light or air, or be incon |