SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2229, 29 June 1870, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

IN BANCO. ; This Day. (Before Mr Justice Chapman.) Saiioood and Another v. MTntosii.— His Honor gave judgment in this case, which was a motion for an order requiring the defendant to bring into Court, to abide the event of the action, the amount of two lulls exchange, which, upon due consideration, the defendant had agreed to endorse as siircty. These bills were drawn-by the plaint ills upon Fleming and Murray, Westport, and transmitted to the drawers, and While in their possession were destroyed by fire. He (the learned Judge) thought the plaintiffs had established a clear pylnia facie case for the equitable relief which fthey asked. With the plaintiffs’ consent he was prepared to sanction the substitution of two responsible sureties,.... Ift tho

ever, ||ltS ILeSIiLIJ AMi^^PfcßAE Hoad :siis an for a mandamus to compel the Board to levy a rate to satisfy a judgment debt obtained against the fine Hill Board by one H. Avas made .on tne: from all personal liability, the planitiit was without other remedy. ’ His' Honor said that so far as the trustees of the local board were concerned,’the reasons in favor of a mandamus appeared overwhelming, but as to the general Board the ca-e' presented itself m a different aspect. There had been shown sufficient connexion between the two Boards under the Eoad Boards Ordinance, especially under tho rating clauses, to render the geue,ral Board amenable to a writ of _ mandamus under circumstances warranting it. It was quite competent for the Court, where no ■ other legal remedy existed, to compel certain functionaries to perform the duties cast upon them by law, ami he agreed with Mr Maoassey that when those duties were divided between two officers or two,; bodies, each might be commanded to perform his part by the same writ. But there was nothing to Show in this case that the general Board was indisposed to lend its necessary aid under the Ordinance so soon as the necessity for it doing so was brought home to the Board. The letter to the trustees of the Board asked for payment of the money, which was neither its duty nor its function. The Board hairrever been, required to;perform its, part, and'it’. appeared to him that whatever Case might be hereafter made, the materials, as against the general Board should be more complete. The present application was premature. The rule would therefore be made absolute against the Pine Hill Board, with costs, and discharged against tho general Hoard. . , JbqyKß isn Another v. Pitt. — Motion to dissolve injunction, Mp Smith in support ; Mr Macassey against. . . The argument had not honeludod at four o’clock.