COURT OF CHANCERY — FRIDAY. (Before the Lords Justices of Appeal). THE MARQUIS OF BUTE v. THE TAFF VALE RAILWAY COMPANY. - In this appeal, the object of which is to seek to restrain the sealing of an agreement between the Taff Vale Railway and the Penarth Harbour and Railway Companies, the arguments occupied the Court the greater part of the day.

Lord Justice Knight Bruce asked whether it would be material if judgement were not given until the month of April.

Mr. Kay: But, my Lord, we have now a Bill before Parliament to carry out our agreement. Lord Justice Knight Bruce Is not that what the civil law would term a locus communis ? It is not impossible but that we may give judgment in the course of the present month. Mr. W. M. James and Mr. Cotton were for the Marquis of Bute; Sir Hugh Cairns, Mr. Rolt, Mr. Lake Russell, and Mr. Kay were for the defendants, the Taff Vale Railway and the Penarth Harbour and Railway Companies. - The Cardiff and Merthyr Guardian Glamorgan Monmouth and Brecon Gazette [156] [361] 21st March 1863.

1863 - The Taff Vale Railway Company - Judgment - 'His Honour to-day gave judgment in this case. The object of this suit was to restrain the Taff Vale Railway Company and the Penarth, Dock, Harbour, and Railway Company from acting upon an agreement entered into between them for the working, use, and management by the Taff Vale Company of the undertaking of the Penarth Company (authorised by the Ely Tidal Harbour and Railway Act, 1856), on the ground that such agreement was in direct violation of covenants entered into by the Taff Vale Company with the trustees of the Marquis of Bute in 1849.

The question in the case turned principally upon the construction of these covenants, which were contained in a lease of certain lands and wharves adjoining the Bute Ship Canal (from Cardiff to the mouth of the Taff river) granted to the Taff Vale Railway Company by the Bute trustees, under the authority of the Taff Vale Railway Extension Act, 1846.

His honour, after referring at length to the provisions of the several acts referred to, and to the covenants and agreements between the parties, said that in his opinion the plaintiffs had entirely failed in making out the proposition that the contract made by the defendants with the Penarth Dock, Harbour, and Railway Company would, if acted upon, be in contravention of the contracts entered into with the trustees of the Bute property. The bill would therefore stand dismissed with costs.

Sir H. Cains, Mr. W. M. James, Q.C., Mr. Rolt, Q.C., Mr. Hobhouse, Q.C., Mr. G. L. Russell. Mr. Cotton, and Mr. Kay, appeared in the cause. Saturday. - The above press cutting was affixed within the pages of a book entitled 'The Law of Railway, Banking, Mining and other Joint Stock Companies' published 1845. [499]

I have been unable to establish the source of this news article and its date of publication but suspect that it was March or April 1863.