ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA. Page 6, line 17, for "29 Car. I. c. 3," read "29 Car. II. c. 3." Page 11, line 45, and marginal note, for "Factory Act," read "Factors Act."' Page 12, note, line 1, for "Scotch Lands Clauses Act," read "Scotch Companies Clauses Act." Page 16, line 35, margin, for "of," read "for." Page 31, line 10, dele "a bill," and after "filed," dele "by them," and insert "a bill." Page 31, line 11, after "directors" insert "it." Page 33, for "Scotch Lands Clauses," read "Scotch Companies Clauses." Page 34, insert-"Where a railway company deposited with a bank a number of shares as security for an advance of money, the certificate on the face of it purporting that the shares were "registered as fully paid up in the books of the company;" and in the register of shareholders the names of the chairman and manager of the bank were inserted simply as holders of the shares, but in the call-book there was the following memorandum-' deposited at bank as security for overdraft;' it was held by the Court of Common Pleas upon a rule for a sci. fa. against the persons in whose names the shares were registered, that they were not liable; but as the petitioner desired to have the question raised upon the record, the Court allowed the sci. fa. to go, subject to a special case. (Guest v. Worcestershire, &c., Railway Co., L. R. 4 C. P. 9.)" Page 39, line 3, insert-" Where an action was brought against a railway company on behalf of the assignee of certain Lloyd's bonds given by that company, the company was held not entitled to rely as a defence on a private agreement, made by deed between them and the original obligor, that the obligor should pay the bonds as they became due, and all interest on them, and should idemnify the company against all losses, charges, damages, and expenses in respect of them. As the company had given the bonds for the purpose of raising money on them, they could not, after the bonds had been assigned for valuable consideration, set up as a defence a secret arrangement between themselves and the obligor, whereby they should be free from liability: (Dickson v. Swansea Vale and Neath and Brecon Railway Co., L. R. 4 Q. B. 44; 38 L. J. Q. B. 17; 19 L. T. N. S. 346.)" Page 42, line 26, for "9 Geo. III.," read "9 Geo. II." Page 48, line 21, before "registered" insert "have been." d Page 53 n. and 55 n., for "Scotch Lands Clauses," read "Scotch Companies Clauses." Page 73, line 14 margin, for "redirection," read "reduction." Page 80, last par. margin, for "leases,” read “secus.” Page 84, line 37, after " property" insert " Page 87, line 23, for "to," read “in.” Page 98, line 18, dele "company." are valid." Page 98, line 21, after "to the," dele "general." Page 165, line 34, for "as," read " on." Page 167, under s. 24, insert "Emmanuel Hospital v. Metropolitan District Railway Co., 3 W. N. 312." Page 174, line 28, for "arbitration" read "arbitrators." Page 196, at bottom of page, insert-" raising pavement or footway of a street above the level of the entrance to plaintiff's house, and rendering it necessary for him to make an access to his house by two steps descending from the pavement: (Ferrar v. Commissioners of Sewers of the City of London, 19 L. T. N. S. 185.)" Page 198, before last paragraph, insert-" An arbitrator is justified in assessing a sum for damages to the goods on the claimant's premises as well as for structural injury and depreciation, of the land: (Knock v. Metropolitan Railway Co., 19 L. T. N. S. 239.)" Page 199, line 40, for "are to," read "should." Page 205, line 31, for "L. R. (Eq.,)" read "L. R. 1 (Eq.)” Page 207, line 4, for " engaged," read "employed.” Page 214, line 7, margin, for "arrest," read "assent." 66 Page 219, last par. margin, for "£2," read “ £20.” Page 221, line 41, for "(15 & 16 Vict. c. 6)," read " (15 & 16 Vict. c. 51.)” Page 225, Re Phillips's Trusts also reported L. R. 6 Eq. 250. Page 230, lines 26, margin, and 46, for "appointment" read" apportionment." Page 230, line 47, after taken," dele "in." 66 Page 231, line 42, for "constitution," read" construction;" and for" appears," read" appeared." Page 238, line 1, margin, for "remission," read "revision." Page 251, add "Emmanuel Hospital v. Metropolitan District Railway Co., 3 W. N. 312." Page 256, after last par., insert-"The Court will not, in a suit on the part of a landowner against a railway company for specific performance of an agreement to take lands, make a decree where there has been no investigation of title, but will refer it to chambers, to see whether a good title can be made: (Garston v. East Gloucestershire Railway Co., 18 L. T. N. S. 8.)" c. 51." Page 257, line 14, for "209," read "ccix." "gone." Page 296, s. cxxx., add-"In Jones v. South Staffordshire Railway Co., 19 L. T. N. S. 603, the Court of Queen's Bench inclined to the opinion that by the arbitration mentioned in this section of the Lands Clauses Act, must be understood an ordinary arbitration, and not such an arbitration as is provided for by the earlier sections in the case of lands compulsorily taken by a company. An arbitration of the latter kind having taken place to determine the price of certain superfluous land, and an award having been made, the Court refused to grant a mandamus to compel the company to take up the award. Page 306, line 31, for “ (14 & 15 Vict. c. 78)," read "(14 & 15 Vict. c. 70).” Addenda et Corrigenda. Page 330, line 32, margin, for "literal," read "lateral." 279. XLI Page 359, line 41, see also Taff Vale Railway Co. v. Davies, 19 L. T. N. S. Page 382, line 4, for "petitioner's," read "plaintiff's." Page 382, line 12, for "petitioner," read "plaintiff." Page 415, line 13, insert-"When an unsuccessful application was made to a judge at chambers for an injunction to restrain a railway company from giving to other persons greater facilities than were accorded to the complainants, and the judge ordered that the complainants should pay the costs of the application, provided they made another unsuccessful application to the Court, 'otherwise no order as to costs,' it was held by the Court of Common Pleas, on motion to rescind or vary the order, that the granting or refusing costs at chambers was in the judge, and was not subject to review: (Re London and South-Western Railway, Co.; ex parte Ilfracombe Public Conveyance Co., Weekly Notes, 23d Jan. 1869.) Page 417, line 7-See Re London and South-Western Railway Co., Weekly Notes, 5th Dec. 1868. |