The House of Lords Cases on Appeals and Writs of Error, Claims of Peerage, and Divorces Volume 3; During the Sessions 1847 [-1866] (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated.1870 Excerpt: ... Bright V. Hutton.--Hutton V. Bright. These were cross appeals. The first was presented by Mr. Bright, who was alleged to have been a shareholder in the Direct Birmingham, Oxford, and Reading Railway Company, and the second by the official manager appointed to wind up the affairs of that company. Both were brought against an order pronounced by Vice-Chancellor Lord Cranworth, who had pronounced it at the express desire of both parties, in order that it might at once be subjected to consideration in the House of Lords. An application was made to the House that the appeals might be heard immediately, and the application being granted, 194 they were argued on Wednesday the 6th of August. The liability of Mr. Bright to be placed on the list of contributories was assumed to be established, and the question argued was as to the mode of calculating the amount of the contribution which he was bound to make in respect of that liability. The Judges were not present at this argument. On the 8th of August, The Lord Chancellor said, that as the question involved in this case depended on the construction of Winding-up Acts, and several different modes of calculating a contributory's liability might be suggested, it would be most proper that the House should have the advantage of the assistance of the Judges. As it was impossible to have that assistance at that moment, all the Judges being absent on circuit, and the session being just about to close, he thought the only proper course would be, to postpone the further consideration of the case till the next session, and he moved that it should be so adjourned. Lord Cranworth expressed his entire concurrence with the course recommended by the Lord Chancellor. The further consideration of the case was ordered to be adjourne...