A decision of some importance was given by Sir Wool
on Wednesday. Mr. Ross took shares in the Estates' Investment Company (Limited); 'on the-faith of a prospectus stating, among Other things, that the Company was in possession of an estate called Leytonstone. It- was not, and Mr. Ross applied to the Court to compel the directors to rescind his 'allotment, to stop making calls, and to hive-his name erased frim the regisler. The Court held that the false representation vitiated the assignment of shares and made the orders requested, and the important. point arises,—against whom is this decree good? Against the directors it certainly is, and very justly, but is it against the creditors ? Suppose somebody had sold the 'Company building materials on 'the faith of Mr. Rims's name, would he have any remedy? If not, which is, we think, quite- impossible, the debision will derange all business, for it amounts to this, that one partner in a firm has
only to prove he was tricked into buying his shares, and the firth ceases, as far as he is concerned, to be liable. Every person trusting a firm must, in fact, inform himself of all its internal Affairs.