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.1871 Excerpt: ... I have postponed my decision on this case until 'I had examined all the authorities cited. I have taken the opportunity of looking into every authority upon the subject, and I can find nothing to shake the opinion I entertained when the argument was closed that this is a very clear case for specific performance. I am very glad that the authorities are consistent with the justice and equity of the case; and therefore I dismiss this appeal with costs. nevertheless legal and valid, if it be made to appear, either by the express provisions of an act of incorporation, or by necessary and reasonable implication therefrom, that a contract which is sought to be enforced in an action at law against a corporation is beyond the scope of the powers granted by its charter; or, in other words, that the legislature did not intend that the bod-created by them should enter into contracts of a character like that which a plaintiff makes the foundation of a claim against it; " and he cites South Yorkshire Railway Co. p. Great Northern Railway Co., 9 Exch. 55, 84, 85; Bateman v. Ashton-underLyne, 3 H. & N. 323; Norwich v. Norfolk Railway, 4 El. & Bl. 397, and cases cited. To which may be added as illustrative of the above doctrine and showing it to be well settled, in cases where it may properly be applied, Taylor p. The Chichester and Midhurst Railway Co., L. R. 2 Exch. 356; L. R. 4 H. L. 628; 4 H. & C. 409; The East Anglian Railway Co. p. The Eastern Counties Railway Co., 11 C. B. 775; 21 L. J., N. S., C. P. 23; Macgregor v. Dover and Deal Railway Co., 18 Q. B. 618; 22 L. J. Q. B. 6O; Bagshaw v. Eastern Union Railway Co., 2 M'N. & G. 389; 19 L. J. Ch. 410; Earl or Shrewsbury p. North Staffordshire Railway Co.. L. R. 1 Eq. 593; Chambers p. Manchester and Milford Railway Co., ...