REG. v. COX. C. C. R. 11th Dec. CRIMINAL LAW-CRUELTY TO CHILDREN-PROOF OF AGE-PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO CHILDREN ACT, 1894 (57 & 58 VICT. c. 41).

Case stated by the chairman of the Worcestershire Quarter Sessions. The prisoner was convicted under the Prevention of Cruelty to Children Act, 1894, of having wilfully neglected certain children under the age of sixteen years of whom he had the custody or charge. The opinion of the court was asked upon several points, but the only question calling for a report was that relating to the sufficiency of the evidence as to the age of the children. An officer of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children gave evidence that he had seen the children and stated what he believed to be their respective ages, all being under sixteen. A constable confirmed this evidence. The mistress of a public elementary school gave evidence that the eldest children attended the school and that she believed they were within the statutory age limit for such schools. The youngest child, a baby in arms, was in court; the other children were not produced. It was submitted on behalf of the prisoner that there was no evidence of the age of the children except the youngest child. Section 17 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Children Act, 1894, provides that "in respect of a child who is alleged in the charge or indictment to be under any specified age and the child appears to the court to be under that age, such child shall for the purposes of this Act be deemed to be under that age unless the contrary is proved.

THE COURT (Lord RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN, C.J., and HAWKINS, MATHEW, GRANTHAM, and DARLING, JJ.) upheld the conviction.

Lord RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN, C.J.-It is said that the only proper evidence of the age of the children was certificates of their births combined with proof of identity. But the ages of the children may be proved by any lawful evidence. It is impossible to say that the evidence given was not evidence proper to be received. As to the age of the parents, the mere statement of the point is an answer to it: the person charged was in the dock and the jury had an opportunity of seeing her for themselves. Conviction affirmed.-COUNSEL, Stamford Hutton; Clarke Hall. SOLICITORS, Clarke & Blundell; W. Morton Phillips, for Coleman & Whiteley, Redditch. [Reported by T. R. C. DILL, Barrister-at-Law.]

REG. v. JUSTICES OF THE WEST RIDING OF YORKSHIRE. Div. Court. 20th Nov.

SEC. 14.

LICENSING ACTS-LICENCE-INN-HOUSE PULLED DOWN-APPLICATION FOR TRANSFER OF LICENCE-JURISDICTION OF JUSTICES-9 GEO. 4 c. 61, In this case a rule nisi had been obtained calling upon the justices of the West Riding of Yorkshire to shew cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue directing them to hear and determine at quarter sessions an appeal by one S. H. Shaw against the refusal of the justices at the special session for the transfer of licences for the borough of Halifax, to grant him, under the provisions of section 14 of the Intoxicating Liquor Licensing Act, 1828, a transfer of the licence to sell by retail excisable liquors to be drunk or consumed on the premises known as the Peacock Inn, which had been pulled down for public improvements, to another fit and convenient house intended to be opened and kept by him as an inn in the same street. The facts as contained in the affidavits were that a Mrs. Toole had been for several years previous to, and was on 30th November, 1894, the licensee of the said house. On 30th November, Mrs. Toole, being about to quit the premises, Shaw, who had become the tenant thereof, although he was never in actual possession of or paid rent for the house, applied at the petty sessions for authority to carry on the business. This authority was granted, and continued in force until the 1st of February, 1895, when Shaw applied to the justices at the special session for a licence. This was granted, and continued in force until the 10th of October, 1895. The Peacock Inn was pulled down for the aforesaid purposes in December, 1894. The general Licensing Meeting was held on the 23rd of August, 1895, and prior to that date Shaw received notice of objection. He agreed with the objectors that the matter should be adjourned until the 27th of September, the date of the adjourned Annual Licensing Meeting. No application was made at that meeting for the renewal of the licence in respect of the Peacock Inn; but it was stated that an application would subsequently be made on Shaw's behalf at the special sessions for the grant of a licence to another house. Notices under the Intoxicating Liquor Licensing Act, 1828, and the Licensing Act, 1872, were duly given of Shaw's intention to apply under Section 14 of the former Act at the special session for a transfer of the licence from the Peacock Inn to another inn. At the special session held on the 29th of July, 1896, the said application was made, when it was opposed on the ground that a licence was not required in the locality, and the justices refused the application. Shaw then appealed to the quarter sessions at Wakefield on the 19th of October, 1896, when it was objected that no appeal lay to the said court on the ground that the application made on the 29th of July, and refused by the justices, was an application for a new licence. The court of quarter sessions being of opinion that the objection was a good one, dismissed the appeal. Shaw then obtained the above rule.

THE COURT (MATHEW and KENNEDY, JJ.) having taken time to consider their judgment, dismissed the appeal.

MATHEW, J., after stating the facts, said that the granting of a licence to Shaw on the 1st of February, 1895, was a mere fiction, as the Peacock Inn had then ceased to exist. On the 26th of July, 1896, the application under section 14 of the Act of 1828 was made on behalf of Shaw. That section provides that "if any house, being kept as an inn by any person duly licensed" under that Act "shall be, or be about to be pulled down or Occupied under the provisions of any Act for the improvement of the highways or for any other public purpose it shall be lawful for

19

the justices to grant to the person whose house shall, as aforesaid, have been or shall be about to be pulled down or occupied for the improvement of the highways or for any other public purpose and who shall open and keep as an inn, some other fit and convenient house. a licence to sell excisable liquors by retail, to be drunk or consumed therein." This section is an extension of section 4, and is to be read with it. Section 4 provides for the holding of special sessions, for transferring licences, and authorises justices thereat "to licence such persons intending to keep inns, theretofore kept by other persons being about to remove from such inns as they, the said justices, shall. deem fit and proper persons. Shaw was never a licensed person within this Act, and his application was really an application for a new licence. KENNEDY, J.-The essential point here is whether this was an application under section 14 so that an appeal would lie. I am not satisfied that Shaw ever actually occupied the premises known as the Peacock Inn, but even if he did, he never occupied them within the meaning of the Act. In order to come under section 14 the house must be kept by the same person who applies for the transfer. The applicant must be the licensed holder of the premises at the time they were pulled down. Shaw fails to bring himself within the meaning of the words in that section, and therefore his appeal must be dismissed. Appeal dismissed with costs. A discussion then arose as to whether the justices were now entitled to their costs, and the Court, in view of the judgment of Lord Herschell in Boulter v. Justices of Kent (1897, A. C. 556) which case overrules Reg. v. Justices of Glamorganshire (40 W. R. 436; 1892, 1 Q. B. 621), decided to reserve this point for further consideration. -COUNSEL, Lawson Walton, Q.C., and T. P. Perks; J. Roskill; Kershaw, Q.C., and Montgommery. SOLICITORS, Williamson, Hill, & Co., for Walsham, Halifax; Baderam & Williams for Trevor Edwards, Wakefield; J. R. Hall, for Keighley Walton, Halifax.

[Reported by E. G. STILLWELL, Barrister-at-Law.]

Bankruptcy Cases.

Re PIERS. Ex parte PIERS v. READ. Wright, J. 18th Dec. BANKRUPTCY-PROOF-AMENDMENT -SECURED CREDITOR - OMISSION TO VALUE OWING TO INADVERTENCE-BANKRUPTCY ACT, 1883 (46 & 47 VICT. c. 52), SCHEDULE 1, R. 10.

In this case C. P. Piers, the assignee of Turnbull, a secured creditor, applied for leave to amend his proof by valuing his security at the full amount of the debt proved for, instead of valuing it at nil. The ground of his application was that his assignor had been led by false information to value his security at nil. The application was opposed by Read, another creditor, on the ground that Turnbull had not omitted to value his security "from inadvertence" within rule 10 of Schedule 1 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, which is as follows: "For the purpose of voting a secured creditor shall, unless he surrender his security, state in his proof the particulars of his security, the date when it was given, and the value at which he assesses it, and shall be entitled to vote only in respect of the balance (if any) due to him after deducting the value of his security. If he votes in respect of his whole debt, he shall be deemed to have surrendered his security, unless the court on application is satisfied that the omission to value the security has arisen from inadvertence." In this case Turnbull had in fact voted at a meeting of creditors in respect of the full amount of his debt. The application was also opposed by a group of creditors for an aggregate sum of £2,000, on the ground that Turnbull had surrendered his security by voting for the full amount of his debt, and had nothing to assign to Piers, who, therefore, had no locus standi. WRIGHT, J., said that he thought he could override the second point because Turnbull still had his debt which he could assign to Piers, but on the point of "inadvertence" he decided against the applicant. He observed that "inadvertence" was a peculiar and unusual word to find in an Act of Parliament, and that he could not construe it contrary to its true signification, which is the opposite of deliberate election-that is to say, that the creditor never meant to do what he really did. In this case he had elected to value his security at nil, and could not be allowed to amend. Application refused.-COUNSEL, McIntyre; Herbert Reed, Q.C., and Nepean; Kent. SOLICITORS, W. Eley; Thomas Edward; Robert Kent.

[Reported by P. M. FRANCKE, Barrister-at-Law.]

Solicitors' Cases.

LEWIS AND ANOTHER v. BURRELL. Div. Court. 16th Dec. COUNTY COURT-PRACTICE-"STATUTORY DEFENCE"-SOLICITORS' BILL OF COSTS-SOLICITORS' ACT (6 & 7 VICT. c. 73), s. 37-COUNTY Court Rules, 1889, ORD. 10., RR. 10 and 18.

Appeal by the plaintiffs from a decision of His Honour Collier, J., sitting at the county court of Liverpool. The action was brought by a firm of solicitors carrying on business at Liverpool to recover their bill of costs. At the hearing of the case the point was taken by the defendant that no properly signed bill of costs had been delivered. The plaintiffs, in answer to the objection, said that the defence set up was a statutory defence of which notice must be given in accordance with the County Court Rules, and that, as no such notice had been given by the defendant, it could not be then raised against their claim. The county court judge decided in favour of the defendant and non-suited the plaintiffs. Counsel in support of the appeal stated the facts thus: The plaintiff's delivered their bill of costs for £11 to the defendant for payment. The defendant raised no objection at the time that the items were not

separately set out in the bill, but refused to pay it on the ground that he had not authorized a "retainer." The action was then brought in the county court to fight only the question of a retainer or no retainer, and the defendant raised at the hearing the statutory defence that the bill as delivered was not a good signed bill of costs under section 37 of the Solicitors Act, 1843. To that the plaintiffs replied that the defendant could not plead such a statutory defence because, by order 10 of the County Court Rules, 1889, notice must be served on the other side, which the defendant had failed to do. Section 37 of the Act of 1843 enacts that no attorney or solicitor shall commence or maintain any action for the recovery of any fees until the expiration of one month after he shall have delivered a signed bill of such charges to the defendant. Ord. 10, r. 10, of the County Court Rules, 1889, is as follows: "Where the defendant intends to rely upon any of the grounds of defence mentioned in rule 18 . . . he shall file a notice stating thereon his name and address together with a concise statement of such ground five clear days before the return day provided that in case of non-compliance with this and the above-mentioned rule and of the plaintiff not consenting at the trial to permit the defendant to avail himself of such defences, the judge may, on such terms as he thinks fit, adjourn the trial of the action to enable the defendant to give such notice." Rule 18 (a) (b) of the same order directs that where in any action the defendant relies upon any statutory defence or any defence of which he is required by any statute to give notice he shall in his statement set forth the year, chapter, and section of the statute or the short title thereof and the principal matter upon which he relies." There was no case decided under the Solicitors Act, 1843, in which the question whether such notice of a statutory defence must be given; but there were four cases reported where it had been so decided under other statutes. Of these the most recent was that of Conroy v. Peacock (1897, 2 Q. B. 6), a case under the Employers' Liability Act. On these authorities counsel submitted the learned judge was wrong, and that a statutory defence under the Solicitors Act could only be pleaded if proper notice were given; that the bill of costs in the absence of this statutory defence being pleaded was a good signed bill. [GRANTHAM, J.-If the defendant had given the statutory notice, the plaintiff would have taken care not to have gone on with his action until he had delivered an amended bill. I doubt if he could in any event have maintained his action on a bill setting out his costs in a lump sum. Why was not the case adjourned to enable the defendant to give notice of the statutory defence he relied on?] The defendant did not ask for any adjournment, and he must be taken to have waived his right to ask for one under ord. 10, r. 10. The plaintiffs were fully prepared to argue the point, and therefore the verdict of a non-suit was wrong, and ought to be set aside and the costs of the day paid to the defendant returned to the plaintiffs. Counsel for the respondent contended that the judgment appealed from was right. The question before the county court judge was whether the bill was a good signed bill. The question was discussed, and he held it was not, and that upon such a bill the plaintiffs had no claim. The Act said that no action to recover costs should be brought until a properly signed bill had been delivered to the defendant. No proper bill had been delivered, and the action was wrong in the inception. The judgment of a non-suit with costs was the only judgment that could properly have been given. [CHANNELL, J.-It seems to me that the statutory notice not having been given the judge ought to have directed an adjournment.]

THE COURT (GRANTHAM and CHANNELL, JJ.) ordered a new trial. GRANTHAM, J., said: The solicitors were very properly not asking for judgment, but only for a new trial. That might have been saved if the judge had adjourned the case. As it was, there was nothing for it but to direct a new trial and have the matter gone into de novo. It was clear that the statutory defence could not be pleaded unless proper notice had been given to the other side. The appeal must be allowed, and the plaintiffs would have the costs of the appeal in any event, but the question of the costs already incurred rested with the county court judge. The question of the costs below had not been raised in the notice of motion. The costs of the new trial must abide the result.

THE LAND TRANSFER ACT, 1897. Report of the Law Committee, submitted to and approved by the vestry of the parish of Chelsea on the 21st of December, 1897. 1. Reporting that they have considered the letter from the clerk, London County Council, dated the 25th of November, referring to the Land Transfer Act, 1897, under section 20 of which Act power is given to her Majesty by Order in Council to declare, as respects any county or part of a county that, after a specified day, registration of title to land is to be compulsory on sale, and thereupon a person shall not under any conveyance on sale, executed on or after the day specified, acquire the legal estate in any freehold land in that county or part of a county unless or until he is registered as proprietor of the land; stating that the council have received from the Privy Council a letter, dated the 19th of November, giving notice, pursuant to section 20, sub-section (5) of the Act, that it is proposed to make an order under that section, applying part 3 of the Act to the county of London, and stating that it is intended that the existing Land Registry in Lincoln's-inn-fields shall be the place where the

registry shall be established, together with such other places as may be thought proper, having regard to the convenience of the districts to be affected by the order; stating further that, as the question of applying the Act to London is a very important matter, the council would be glad, before coming to a decision thereon, to have the views of those bodies in the county who are specially interested; and asking the vestry to be good enough, should they so desire, to furnish the council with their views on the subject.

In connection with this communication, the committee have considered the letter from the vestry of Kensington, dated the 2nd of December, forwarding copy of a report by their law and parliamentary committee, relative to the Land Transfer Act, 1897, and stating that they have informed the London County Council that they do not approve of registration of title being made compulsory in the county of London, and have expressed a hope that the council will take steps to prevent the application of the provisions of the Act to the county. The committee have also had before them a letter from the assistant registrar of the land registry, dated the 7th of December, forwarding statements of the methods and results of the registration of titles to land in this and other countries.

2. It will readily be admitted that the subject of the registration of titles to land is one of great importance to the community, and, no doubt, theoretically there is much to be said in favour of such a system. 3. The committee, however, consider that there are serious practical objections to the introduction of a compulsory system of registration, inasmuch as it must lead to unnecessary delay and increased expensemore especially in the case of small purchases arising from payment of fees, preparation of maps, and attendances at the land registry, and will thereby tend to diminish transactions in land. Moreover, it is the supercession of an old and well-tried system by what may be termed an untried, and, as regards this country at all events, a purely experimental method. Since the passing of the Conveyancing Acts of 1881 and 1882 transfers of land can be, and as a rule are, carried out with dispatch, and, in view of the legal responsibility involved, at moderate cost. 4. Complications are also likely to arise on the sale more particularly of portions of building estates, which would involve a fresh registration of each portion sold.

5. As regards the registration of what is called a possessory title." this seems likely to cause unnecessary doubts to arise as to the legal validity and sufficiency of a landowner's title to his holding, and would probably operate in such a manner as to depreciate its value. Although the Act itself refers specifically to freeholds, power is reserved for extending its provisions to leaseholds by means of rules.

6. Compulsory registration would, the committee submit, materially increase the cost of transfer in the case of properties purchased through building and land societies, many of whom, at the present time, grant free conveyances to their purchasers.

7. The committee would also point out that if the provisions of the Act are to be carried out successfully in London, a considerable addition would have to be made to the staff at the Land Registry Office in Lincolns-inn-fields, and that it would be difficult to put an end to the system (if commenced), in the event of the experiment proving a failure. The consequence would be that the fees would have to be materially increased, or the deficiency made up by the tax-payer.

8. It must not be supposed that under the proposed system any increase of security would necessarily be given to landowners. On the contrary, it appears from the report of a case before the Privy Council, so recently Victoria, not only lost his charge but obtained no compensation, and in as the year 1891, that the owner of a registered charge in the colony of Austria, under the register system, according to the report of Mr. Brickdale, the assistant registrar of the Land Registry, there were 1,500 cases of fraud during the twenty years from 1850 to 1870.

it is not pretended, on that account, that property in Middlesex is worth 9. There is a system of registry of deeds in the county of Middlesex, but more than property of a similar class, say, in Surrey by reason of the mere registration of the deeds.

10. It ought to be mentioned that the country at large is open to the application of the new method for experiment. The order for compulsory registration is only to be put in force where not objected to by the county council. From this it will be seen that the proposal is only a tentative one, and in fact, the Legislature itself seems almost to have doubted whether or not the mischief of the proposed system could only be bounded by the narrowness of its operation.

11. Under these circumstances, and in view of the varied interests and the large number of properties which would be affected, and of the great uncertainty which exists as to the effect of the new system, it seems to the committee undesirable that such a doubtful experiment should first be tried in the county of London, where the pecuniary interests at stake far transcend those which would be involved in the event of an application of the Act being first extended to some other locality or county.

12. If it were attempted to deal only with a district of the county of London, the committee are of opinion that, should failure ensue, considerable confusion would arise from one portion of the county being singled out for treatment differing from the other portions.

13. Apart altogether from the merits or demerits of the system, it naturally occurs to the committee to suggest that the experiment should in the first instance, at least, be made in a district where, if failure does result, it will cause as little injury, expense, and confusion as possible. The committee, therefore,

Recommend that the London County Council be informed that the vestry are of opinion that the county of London is not a suitable area in which the first experiment of compulsory registration of land title should be tried. T. HOLLAND, Vestry Clerk.

LEGAL NEWS.

OBITUARY.

Sir FRANK LOCKWOOD, Q.C., died at his residence, 24, Lennox-gardens, at half-past two on Sunday afternoon. He had been suffering from influenza for some weeks past. He was the son of Mr. Charles Day Lockwood, of Doncaster, and was educated at Caius College, Cambridge. He was a pupil of Mr. J. W. Mellor, and was called to the bar in 1872; became a Queen's Counsel in 1882, and, curiously enough, was included in the same "batch of silks" with Sir R. T. Reid, afterwards his colleague as law officer. After he became a Queen's Counsel his practice rapidly increased, and he ultimately obtained the position of one of the leading advocates of the day. He was one of the counsel who appeared before the Parnell Commission, but took a very small part in the proceedings. In 1885 he was elected member for the City of York, and held that position till his death. In October, 1894, he was appointed Solicitor-General upon Sir J. Rigby's elevation to the bench, and was knighted upon his appointment. Last year he visited the United States in company with the Lord Chief Justice.

APPOINTMENTS.

Mr. RICHARD MARRACK, Mr. JAMES WILLIAMS, and Mr. JAMES S. GREEN, Barristers-at-Law, have been re-appointed members of the Board of Examiners established by the four Inns of Court under rule 4 of the "Consolidated Regulations."

Mr. LIONEL HORTON-SMITH has been appointed as a new Member of the above-mentioned Board.

Mr. WILLIAM PINDER EVERSLEY, barrister, has been appointed Recorder of Sudbury, in the place of the Hon. John de Grey, resigned.

Mr. THOMAS SPOONER SODEN, barrister, has been appointed Recorder of Grantham in the place of Mr. Edmund Lumley, resigned.

CHANGES IN PARTNERSHIPS.

DISSOLUTION.

STEPHEN DONNE and ABRAHAM FAY WILLIAMS, solicitors, Oswestry (Donne & Williams). Nov. 1. The said Abraham Fay Williams will henceforth carry on the said business alone under the same style. [Gazette, Dec. 21.

INFORMATION WANTED.

CHARLES WILLIAM CORNMELL.-If any solicitor or other person should have prepared and now have the custody of the will of the late Charles William Cornmell, late of Lloyds, and 4, Eldon-road, Kensington, in the county of London, insurance broker, deceased, he will oblige by communicating with either of the undersigned. All proper legal and other expenses will be paid by the surviving brother, Mr. Richard Budd Cornmell, and his sister, Mrs. Annie Maria Budd. Dated the 21st of December, 1897. Robert T. Wragg, 11, Gt. St. Helen's, Bishopsgate, E.C., solicitor for the said R. B. Cornmell; Stone, King, & Co., 12, New-court, Lincoln's-inn, and Bath, solicitors for Mrs. A. M. Budd.

GENERAL.

It has been arranged that Mr. Justice Grantham shall take the SouthEastern Circuit in place of Mr. Justice Wright, who will remain in town for the purpose of disposing of companies winding up and bankruptcy business, and sitting with the Railway and Canal Commission.

Mr. Justice Wright, after consultation with the members of the bar present in court, has announced that he intends to devote Wednesdays to company business as at present, Mondays to bankruptcy, and Saturdays to the remanets from both classes of business.

At the assizes at Birmingham, on the 15th inst., before Mr. Justice Wills, Hubert James Smart was charged in the first count of an indictment with feloniously shooting at Robert Jeffery Parr, solicitor, on the 9th of September last, with intent to kill him, and in a second count with attempting to discharge a pistol at Mr. Parr with intent to kill him. The jury found the prisoner guilty of shooting with intent to kill, and the judge passed sentence of twelve years' penal servitude.

The judges (Bigham and Darling, JJ.) have fixed the following commission days for the winter assizes on the Western Circuit-viz., Devizes, Tuesday, the 11th of January; Dorchester, Saturday, the 15th of January; Taunton, Wednesday, the 19th of January; Bodmin, Tuesday, the 25th of January; Exeter, Tuesday, the 1st of February; Winchester, Monday, the 7th of February; Bristol, Monday, the 14th of February. Darling, J., will not join the circuit until Exeter is reached.

The following is the rota arranged by the judges of the Queen's Bench Division for the ensuing Hilary sittings: The Lord Chief Justice and Mathew, Day, Grantham, Lawrance, Bruce, and Darling, JJ., will be the judges who will sit to form Divisional Courts; Hawkins, Wills, Wright, Kennedy, Ridley, Bigham, and Channell, JJ., will proceed with the hearing of actions, while Phillimore, J., will be the judge in attendance at chambers. This order, however, will have to be modified from time to time as the judges leave town for their respective circuits.

them.

by the retirement of Mr. Graham Hastings. Throughout the whole of the period during which his lordship had sat as a judge in that court-a period of eleven years-he had received the most valuable assistance from Mr. Hastings, always rendered with unfailing courtesy and kindness. His lordship was sure that all who knew the learned counsel would unite in wishing him many years of health in which to enjoy the well-merited repose he now sought. His lordship, who was visibly affected while making these remarks, quitted the court directly he had concluded The following are the arrangements made for hearing probate and matrimonial cases during the ensuing Hilary law sittings. Undefended matrimonial cases will be taken on Tuesday and Wednesday, the 11th and 12th of January, and on each Monday during the sittings after the motions. Special jury cases will be taken on and after Thursday, the 13th of January, until finished. Probate and defended matrimonial causes for hearing before the court itself will be taken after the special juries are finished, and will also be taken in Court II. after the 13th of January when Admiralty cases are not appointed to be heard. Common jury cases will be taken on and after Thursday, the 17th of February. Probate and matrimonial causes will be put into one list and will be taken in the order in which they are set down. Divisional courts will be formed to sit on Tuesdays, the 1st of March and 5th of April. Supplemental lists will be published from time to time, and three days' notice will be given when such lists will be proceeded with. Motions will be heard in court on Monday, the 17th of January, at 11 o'clock, and on every succeeding Monday during the sittings, and summonses before the judge will be heard at 10.30 on Saturday, the 15th of January, and every succeeding Saturday during the sittings.

The papers are full of stories of the late Sir Frank Lockwood. The Daily Telegraph says that his first appearance in the Chancery Division occasioned much surprise to the learned judge who was presiding. "What brings you here, Mr. Lockwood?" he said. Nothing abashed by so unfamiliar a question, Sir Frank looked at the outside of his brief, and replied in a matter-of-fact way, "Three and one, my lord, merely three and one," alluding, of course, to the number of guineas marked on his brief as regards the first amount, and the smaller sum having reference to the conference fee. After successfully defending a prisoner in the Criminal Court, who had put forward a very satisfactory alibi, Sir Frank went for a walk in the circuit town, and during his perambulations he met the judge who had presided. Addressing him, the learned judge said, "Well, Lockwood, that was a very good alibi." "Yes, my lord," was the answer, "I had three offered me, and I think I selected the best." Unlike many persons whose "impromptus" require apparently a long period of incubation, Sir Frank Lockwood's genius was essentially ready to the occasion. A good sample of this faculty is afforded in connection with a case where a director of some doubtful company was being crossexamined. He was giving evidence bearing upon a rather shady history, when Sir Frank put the question to the promoting director, "Now, tell me, sir, when did you first determine to float this "Float this company,' asked company with the witness, some surprise, "I don't know what you mean by 'floating' the company." Very well, then," replied Sir Frank, "I will make my meaning perfectly clear. By floating the company I refer to the operation which almost invariably precedes the sinking of a company. Do you understand me now?" This illustration evidently impressed the witness sufficiently, and during the remainder of his evidence he was disconcerted to such a degree that he fell an easy victim to the skill of the experienced lawyer. The St. James's Gazette adds that Sir Frank was fond of telling stories against himself. "I was defending a man at York once who was accused of stealing cattle-beasts' they call them up there. I said to a witness, 'Now, my man, you say you saw so-and-so; how far can you see a beast to know it?' Just as far off as I am from you,' he replied instantly, amidst roars of laughter all over the court." Once he went to a religious meeting at which Judge Waddy, a circuit friend, was speaking. Mr. Waddy thought the visitor looked cynical, and turned the tables by saying, "Now, my dear friends, Brother Lockwood will lead us in a hymn.'

FOR THROAT IRRITATION AND COUGH.-" Epps's Glycerine Jujubes always prove effective. They soften and clear the voice, and are invaluable to all suffering from cough, soreness, or dryness of the throat. Sold only in labelled tins, price 74d. and 1s. 14d.-James Epps & Co., Ltd., Homœoopathic Chemists, London.-[ADVT.]

WARNING TO INTENDING HOUSE PURCHASERS AND LESSEES.-Before purchasing or renting a house, have the Sanitary Arrangements thoroughly Examined, Tested, and Reported Upon by an Expert from Messrs. Carter Bros., 65, Victoria-street, Westminster. Fee quoted on receipt of full particulars. (Established 21 years.)-[Advt.]

WINDING UP NOTICES.
London Gazette.-FRIDAY, Dec. 17.
JOINT STOCK COMPANIES.
LIMITED IN CHANCERY.

BRITISH CYCLE MANUFACTURING CO, LIMITED-Petn for winding up, presented Dec 14, directed to be heard on Jan 12. Ward & Co, 7, King st, Cheapside, solors for petners. Notice of appearing must reach the above-named not later than 6 o'clock in the afternoon of Jan 11

names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to William Hardy King, 13 and 14, Basinghall st

GLORE REFINING CO, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before Jan 17, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to Mr Charles Arthur Tricks, Nicholas st, Bristol. Dixon & Dixon, Bristol, solors to liquidator JOHN HEYS & Co, LIMITED (IN VOLUNTARY LIQUIDATION)-Creditors are required, on or before Jan 31, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to John T. Heys, c/o Messrs Haworth & Broughton, 5, Union st, Accrington SHEEN HOUSE CYCLING CLUB, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before Dec 31, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to William Henry Davis, Howard House, Arundel st, Strand. Rowe & Maw, Norfolk st, Strand, solors to liquidator

SOUTH KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA CYCLE SUPPLY AND INSTRUCTION CO, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before Jan 15, to send their names and addresses, together with full particulars of their debts or claims, to Henry George Wheeler, 147A, Fulham rd STEAMSHIP "LANDORE" Co, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before Dec 31, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to E. W. Crosbie Oates, S, Cook st, Liverpool

FRIENDLY SOCIETY DISSOLVED. WORKMAN'S HOPE FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Swan Inn, Lye Waste, Oldwinsford, Worcester. Dec 1 London Gazette.-TUESDAY, Dec. 21. COMPANIES.

JOINT

STOCK

LIMITED IN CHANCERY.

EQUITABLE INVESTMENT CO, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before Jan 20, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts and claims, to Mr Walter C. Lewis, 3, Warwick ct, Gray's inn. Lewis, 14, South sq, Gray's inn, solor to liquidator

GEORGE HOPKINS, LIMITED (VOLUNTARY LIQUIDATION)-Creditors are required, on or before Jan 21, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to C. E. Dovey, 31, Queen st, Cardiff

INTERNATIONAL FIBRE CHAMOIS CO, LIMITED-Petn for winding up, presented Dec 15, directed to be heard on Jan 12. W. H. Court, 69, Aldersgate st, solor for petner. Notice of appearing must reach the above-named not later than 6 o'clock in the afternoon of Jan 11

ROBINSON & PRICE, LIMITED (THE OLD COMPANY)-Creditors are required, on or before Feb 11, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to George Barker Mercer, 38, Chatham st, Liverpool. Mackay, Liverpool, solor for liquidator ROODEPOORT DEEP LEVEL GOLD MINING CO, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before Feb 21, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to William Slingsby Ogle, 90, Cannon st. Hicks & Co, 13, Old Jewry chbrs, solors for liquidator FRIENDLY SOCIETIES DISSOLVED.

MILL, HARRIETT ISABELLA, Sydenham, Kent Jan 10 Colman & Knight, Raymond
bldgs, Gray's inn
MILLS, THOMAS, Radcliffe, Lancaster Dec 31 Pickstone & Jones, Radcliffe
NEWMAN, MATTHEW, Hayes ct, Hayes Jan 20 Woodbridge & Sons, Uxbridge
PAULING, RICHARD CLARKE, Victoria st March 10 Apps & Son, South sq, Gray's inn
PHIPPARD, ARABELLA SARAH, Swanage, Dorset Jan 9 Andrews & Co, Dorchester
PRATT, GEORGE, Burnham on Crouch, Essex Dec 24 Leader, St Paul's Churchyard
RAYMENT, HENRY, Hertford, Merchant Jan 31 Spence & Co, Hertford
SHARMAN, Mrs MARY, Balham Jan 10 Herbert, Cork st, Burlington grdns
STEPHENSON, THOMAS, Cambridge Jan 1 D'Albain & Ellis, Newmarket
TAYLOR, HENRY, Eastbourne March 1 Rising & Ravenscroft, Leadenhall st
TERRY, JOHN, Sutton upon Trent, Licensed Victualler Jan 14 Masser, Nottingham
THOMAS, ANN, Hendon Jan 24 Rawlings & Butt, Walbrook

TIMMINS, HANNAH, Handsworth, Stafford Jan 1 Wheldale, Birmingham
TIMMINS, SAMUEL PEARSON, Handsworth, Stafford, Butcher Jan 1 Wheldale, Birming-
ham

TRUSLER, JAMES, Preston, Sussex Jan 24 Hardwick, Brighton
TRUSLER, SARAH, Brighton Jan 24 Hardwick, Brighton

Jan 15 Caprons & Co,

WALLACE, Dame AMELIE JULIE CHARLOTTE, Manchester sq
Savile pl, Conduit st
WEAVER, ELIZA ANN, Kilburn Jan 10 Roscoe & Hincks, Christopher st, Finsbury sq
WEBSTER, JOHN, Croydon Jan 17 S Hughes & Sons, Bedford st
WESTGARTH, JOSEPH, Morecambe, Lancaster, Groom Dec 21 Fawcett, Morecambe
WHITAKER, THOMAS, Nottingham, Farmer Jan 17 Brown, Newark on Trent
WHITELEY, GERALDINE LOUISA, Greetland, York Jan 26 England, Halifax
WICKENDEN, ALFRED, Pagham, Sussex Jan 11 Staffurth & Staffurth, Bognor
WILLETTS, NOAH, Dudley, Worcester Dec 29 Rollason, Birmingham
WOOD, EMMA, Sproughton, Suffolk Jan 8 Josselyn & Sons, Ipswich
WOODMAN, HENRY RICHARD, Hemel Hempstead, Corn Merchant Jan 20 Pitts, Strand
YATES, OLIVER, Southport Jan 5 Wilding & Son, Blackburn

London Gazette.-TUESDAY, Dec. 14.

KEEVIL PROVIDENT SOCIETY, Rose and Crown Inn, Keevil, Wilts. Dec 15

MARKET DEEPING DISTRICT A. O. FORESTERS, White Horse Inn, Market Deeping, Lincoln (at its request). Dec 15

WALDRINGFIELD FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Schoolrooms, Waldringfield, Woodbridge, Suffolk. Dec 15

CREDITORS' NOTICES.

UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY.

LAST DAY OF CLAIM.
London Gazette.-FRIDAY, Dec. 10.

GREEN, WILLIAM ALFRED, Wolverhampton Jan 18 Prentis v Green, Byrne, J Diggles
& Ogden, Manchester
STACK, JAMES, Tranmere, Chester, Printer Jan 11 Stack v Stack, Registrar, Liverpool
Johnson, Liverpool

UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. CAP. 35.

LAST DAY OF CLAIM.

London Gazette.-FRIDAY, Dec. 10.

BAKER, WILLIAM, Nottingham, Rope Maker

ham

Jan 1

Johnstone & Williams, NottingBANKS, HENRY WILLIAM, Addiscombe, Surrey Jan 10 Stopher, Queen Victoria st BAYLEY, ROBERT HENRY, Florence rd, Finsbury Park, Optician Jan 27 Moodie & Son, Basinghall avenue

BETTS, MARY ELIZABETH, Norwood Feb 1 Howard, Weymouth

BOON, JANE, Canning Town Jan 31 Arthur Blott, Stratford
BRICKWOOD, JOHN, Derby, Farmer Dec 24 Eddowes & Sons, Derby
BROOME, JOHN, Lea Mills, Derby Jan 15 Potter, Matlock Bridge

CAVE, Sir LEWIS WILLIAM, Woodmansterne, Epsom Jan 31 Collyer-Bristow & Co,

BATH, THOMAS INGLEDEW, Edmonton Jan 18 Parker, Monument sq chmbrs

BINCH, WALTER, Nottingham Jan 1 Burton & Briggs, Nottingham
BIRRELL, CAROLINE, Deal, Kent Jan 31 Minet & Co, King William st
BLAKEY, WILLIAM, Buslingthorpe, nr Leeds, Wheelwright Jan 20 Bailey, Leeds
BOAM, WILLIAM, Kegworth, Leicester, Licensed Victualler Jan 1 Wells & Hind,

Nottingham

BOYLE, WILLIAM HENRY DAVID, Chelsea Feb 1 FC Mathews & Co, Cannon st
BROWN, HENRY, Leicester Dec 21 Bulman, Leicester

CAIRNS, ROBERT, Wallsend, Northumberland, Innkeeper Jan 10 Stanton & Atkinson,
Newcastle upon Tyne

CAMERON, JOHN, Finsbury, Fancy Printer Jan 30 Brook, South sq, Gray's inn
CONGDON, WILLIAM FREDERICK, South Austell, Cornwall Jan 1 Coode & Co, St

Austell

DALKIN, SARAH, Scarborough Jan 10 Jennings, Bishop Auckland

DAVIS, URIAH JAMES, Painswick, Gloucester Jan 31 Bretherton & Co, Gloucester
DEWICK, JAMES THOMAS, Leicester Jan 10 Harding & Barnett, Leicester

DICKINSON, CATHERINE MARY, Vauxhall walk, Lambeth Jan 15 Clarke & Symes,
Islington
EATON, GEORGE BLYTHMAN, Sheffield Jan 31 Broomhead & Co, Sheffield
EHRHART, JOHN, Wood Green Feb 1 W Houghton & Son, New Broad st
ELY, WILLIAM, sen, Tattershall Jan 30 Clitherow & Son, Tattershall, Lincoln
FLETCHER, GEORGE, Crosby, Lancs, Stockbroker Jan 31 McGowen, Liverpool
GROVES, HENRY, Yeovil Jan 3 HS & S Watts, Yeovil

HALESTRAP, ALFRED CAGER, Hertford Jan 31 Spence & Co, Hertford
KERSHAW, AMOs, Rochdale, Beerhouse Keeper Jan 13 Leach & Son, Manchester
JACKSON, WILLIAM, Scarborough Jan 10 Jennings, Bishop Auckland
JACKSON, WILLIAM HENRY, Eccles, Lancs Jan 8 Orrell, Manchester
JAMES, LAWFORD RHODES, Broadstairs Jan 20 Wood, Finsbury sq
JONES, CHRISTIAN COBHAM, Rhyl, Flint Jan 20 Wood, Finsbury sq
LAMB, JOHN, Cockfield, Durham, Yeoman Jan 10 Jennings, Bishop Auckland
LIGHTFOOT, EDWARD RICHARD, Dellfield, Cowley Jan 1 Sedgwick, Watford
LOWE, JOHN EDGAR, Laurence Pountney hill Jan 31 Freeman & Bothamley, Queen st,
Cheapside
MARYON, JOHN JOSEPH, Green lanes, Licensed Victualler Feb 1 Isaacs, Basinghall avue

Berners st

HOPKINS, EMMA, Lymington, Southampton Jan 20 Moore & Co, Lymington
HOUNSELL, EMMA NATALIA, Torquay Jan 16 Hooper & Wollen, Torquay
IVES, JOHN ARTHUR, Shipley, Yorks, Builder's Clerk Jan 11 Morgan & Morgan,
Shipley
LOFTUS, FERRARS COMPTON CLARGES, Ingatestone, Essex Jan 24 Baileys & Co,
MCCRACKEN, JAMES, Greenleighton, Farmer Jan 15 Gibson, Newcastle on Tyne
MACKINNON, Surgeon Major General Sir WILLIAM, KCB, South Kensington Jan 16
Fladgate & Co, Craig's ct, Charing Cross
MALIN, JOHN, Knowle, Warwick, Farmer Jan 20 Lane & Co, Birmingham
MARSH, JOHN WILFORD, Medical Superintendent, Bracebridge, nr Lincoln Jan 10
Andrew & Trotter, Lincoln
MILLAIS, Sir EVERETT, Shepperton, Bart Jan 28 Richard Taylor & Co, Field ct, Gray's

inn

NEAVE, ISAAC, Edingthorpe, Norfolk, Farmer Dec 31 Wilkinson, North Walsham PLATT, THOMAS, Hurst, nr Newcastle under Lyne Jan, 15 Whitworth, Ashton under

Lyne POTTS, FREDERICK, Walworth Jan 11 Forbes & Son, London st, Fenchurch st RUTLEY, ELIZABETH JAMES, Bickleigh, Devon Jan 20 Bulteel & Co, Plymouth SKILLINGTON, CHARLES, Lincoln, Horsedealer Jan 10 Andrew & Trotter, Lincoln SUTCLIFFE, FREDERICK, Liverpool, Solicitor's Clerk Dec 21 Robinson & Co, Bradford TATTAM, WILLIAM HENRY, Denmark Hill Jan 14 Hugill, Cannon st TREDELL, LOUISA, Croydon Jan 20 Capel-Cure & Ball, Clements inn WARD, JAMES, Boston, Lincoln, Farmer Feb 1 Peake & Co, Sleaford WHITE, JOHN, Plymouth Jan 1 Brian, Plymouth

WILKS, CUTHBERT, Lincoln Jan 10 Andrew & Trotter, Lincoln

London Gazette.-FRIDAY, Dec. 17.

ALEXANDER, RHODA, Barnstaple, Devon Jan 15 Harding & Son, Barnstaple
ASTLEY, DANIEL, Chorley, Lancs, Brewery Manager Jan 17 Barlow, Wigan
AUSTEN, CASSANDRA ESTEN, Plymouth Jan 18 Gill, Devonport
BARNETT, ELIZABETH, Nantwich, Cheshire Feb 1 Hensley, Nantwich
BOWDEN, GEORGE, Swansea, Provision Merchant Jan 17 Morgan & Co, Cardiff
BRAY, HANNAH, Horbury, nr Wakefield Jan 22 Dransfield & Hodgkinson, Penistone
BRAY, MARY, Horbury, nr Wakefield Jan 22 Dransfield & Hodgkinson, Penistone

DAVIES, MARY ANNE, Llangain, Carmarthen Jan 10 Browne, Carmarthen

row

Strand

FORD, ANDREW, Leeds Jan 29 Jones & Co, Leeds

FOURACRE, JUDITH, Winstanley, Lancs Jan 22 Darlington & Sons, Wigan
GANDER, THOMAS, Warnham, Sussex, Farmer Jan 20 Cotching, Horsham
Gottschalk, GUSTAV, Distaff lane Jan 16 Lawrance & Co, Old Jewry chmbrs

HOLMES, THOMAS, Llanarth, Monmouth, Yeoman Feb 2 Watkins & Co, Pontypool
HOLT, ELIAS, Highbury Jan 20 Holt, Gray's inn sq

HEATON, ANNE, Leeds Jan 29 Jones & Co, Leeds

Hewitt, ALFRED, Lancaster Gate, Hyde pk Feb 13 Budd & Co, Bedford row
IREDELL, LOUISA, Croydon Jan 20 Capel-Cure & Ball, Clement's inn

JOHNSON, ELIZABETH MARY, Dover Feb 17 Lewis & Pain, Dover

JOHNSON, JOSEPH, Barrow on Soar, Leicester, Farmer Feb 1 Woolley & Co, Lough-
borough
LAYTON, FREDERICK CHAMPION, Newcastle upon Tyne Feb 1 Stanton & Atkinson,
Newcastle upon Tyne

LONG, ELIZA, Cheltenham March 14 Drew, Cheltenham

LOWE, CHARLOTTE, Bromley, Stafford Jan 20 Lɔwe & Auden, Burton on Trent

Lincoln's inn

Jan 31 Thorpe,

Jan 15 Dale &

COYNE, HAROLD, CHRISTIAN DENNIS COYNE, and ARTHUR
COYNE, Ilford, Bootmakers High Court Pet Dec 15
Ord Dec 15
CRICK, JOHN HENRY, Mildenhall, Suffolk, Shopkeeper

Bury St Edmunds Pet Dec 14 Ord Dec 14
CRITCHLEY, FANNY, Lancaster, Grocer
28 Ord Dec 9

Burnley Pet Oct

DAMARO, ENRICO, Clifton, Bristol, Professor of Music Bristol Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13

DENTON, FREDERICK, and JOSEPH ALLEN, Irthlingborough, Boot Manufacturers Northampton Pet Dec 15 Ord

Dec 15

EDWARDS, SAMUEL, Buckingham, Cycle Dealer Banbury Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13

TANSON, JAMES, Chichester, Fish Hawker Brighton Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13

TROWBRIDGE, WILLIAM, Shaftesbury, Dorsets, Cabinet Maker Salisbury Pet Dec 10 Örd Dec 10

TOY, FRANK, Leeds, Grocer Leeds Pet Dec 14 Ord Dec 14 TUCKER, JOSEPH, Crowhurst, Sussex, Farmer Oxford Pet

Nov 26 Ord Dec 13

WEEKS, MORGAN, Pontypridd, Commission Agent Ponty

pridd Pet Dec 15 Ord Dec 15

WHINRAY, THOMAS, jun, Arnside, Westmorland, Butcher
Kendal Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13
WILLIAMS, JABEZ, Laisterdyke, Builder Bradford Pet
Dec 14 Ord Dec 14

WRIGHT, JAMES, Stafford, Glass Manufacturer Stour-
bridge Pet Dec 10 Ord Dec 10

Amended notice substituted for that published in the
London Gazette of Dec 10:

FAWCETT, CHARLES ARTHUR, Dewsbury, Lodging house HILES, ELLEN MARY JOSEPHINE, Oxford

HARRIS, RICHARD, Kingswood, Gloucester, Coal Dealer
Bristol Pet Dec 15 Ord Dec 15
HILL, ROBERT, Darlington, Clerk Stockton on Tees Pet
Dec 13 Ord Dec 13

INGLETON, FREDERICK BEECH, Newport, Mon, Commission
Agent Newport Pet Dec 14 Ord Dec 14
JENKINS, JOHN, Penrhiwceiber, Glam, Stationer Ponty-
pridd Pet Dec 14 Ord Dec 14

JINKS, ALFRED, Worthing, Jobmaster Brighton Pet Nov 23 Ord Dec 13

JONES, FREDERICK TOPHAM, Niton, I of W, Hotel Pro-
prietor Newport Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13
LANE, WALTER, Bedminster, Grocer Bristol
Ord Dec 13

Pet Nov 8

LECHMERE, EDWARD, Pimlico, Dental Surgeon High Court Pet Dec 15 Ord Dec 15

LONSDALE, WILLIAM, Southport, Provision Dealer Liverpool Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13

MACKIE, FRANK HECTOR, Kirstead, Norfolk, Upholsterer's
Salesman Great Yarmouth Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13
MESILLA VALLEY IRRIGATION COLONY, Victoria st High
Court Pet Oct 26 Ord Dec 15
NEWBY, JOSEPH WAKERLEY, Syston, Leicester, Wheel-
wright Leicester Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13
OZYER, JOHN WILLIAM, Roundhay, nr Leeds, Joiner Leeds
Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13

PHILBRICK, HORACE, Southampton, Solicitor Southampton
Pet Nov 9 Ord Dec 15

READ, CHARLES, Clapham, Licensed Victualler High Court
Pet Dec 1 Ord Dec 15
SAPTE, WILLIAM, jun, Gt Tower st, Journalist Brighton
Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 18

SCHOELLES, FERDINAND, Prestwich, nr Manchester, Merchant Manchester Pet Dec 6 Ord Dec 13

EVANS, EDWARD MEREDITH, Penygra'g, Glam, Saddler
Dec 30 at 12 65, High st, Merthyr Tydfil
GILLOTT, BARTRAM, Cleethorpes, Joiner Dec 31 at 11.30
Off Rec, 15, Osborne st, Gt Grimsby
JINKS, ALFRED, Worthing, Jobmaster
Rec, Pavilion bldgs, Brighton
JONES, HENRY, Aberaman, Aberdare, Collier
65, High st, Merthyr Tydfil
MARTIN, HENRY, Twickenham Dec 30 at 3 Off Rec, 95,
Temple chmbrs, Temple avnue
MILLER, ALICE, Lancaster, Innkeeper Dec 24 at 11.30 Off
Rec, 14, Chapel st, Preston

POOL, L FOWLER, Walthamstow Des 29 at 12 Bankruptcy bldgs, Carey st

READ, CHARLES, Clapham, Licensed Victualler Dec 24 at 11 Bankruptcy bldgs, Carey st RICHARDSON, ALBERT, Dewsbury, Wholesale Fruit Merchant Dec 24 at 12 Off Rec, Bank chmbrs, Batley ROBERTSON, WILLIAM, New Cleethorpes, Tailor Dec 31 at 11 Off Rec, 15, Osborne st, Gt Grimsby SCHOELLES, FERDINAND, Manchester, Merchant Dec 31 at 2.30 Off Rec, Byrom st, Manchester SCOTT, GEORGE ALFRED, Liversedge, Timekeeper Dec 24 at 10 Off Rec, Bank chmbrs, Batley SIMPSON, CHARLES, Walworth, Salesman Dec 29 at 11 Bankruptcy bldgs, Carey st

STIDOLPH, THOMAS FREDERICK, Woodbridge, Suffolk, Organ

Builder Dec 29 at 2 Off Rec, 36, Princes st, Ipswich STURGESS, WILLIAM LIONEL, Buckland, Portsmouth, Grocer

Dec 24 at 12 Off Rec, Cambridge Junction, High st, Portsmouth

ADJUDICATIONS.

ARROWSUCH, JOB, Cannock, Staffs, Greengrocer

Pet Dec 15 Ord Dec 15

Walsall

BARCLAY, HENRY JAMES, Cornhill High Court Pet Sept 20 Ord Dec 14

BAXTER, HENRY, Burnley, Butcher Burnley Pet Dec 10 Ord Dec 10

BOURGEOIS, ACHILLE, Finsbury Park, Watch Importer High Court Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13

BURRELL, JOSEPH, Shipley, Yorks, Boot Maker Bradford Pet Dec 14 Ord Dec 14

CANTELO, FRANK, Sandown, I of W, Ironmonger Newport Pet Dec 15 Ord Dec 15

CHAPMAN, HERBERT, Arundel st, Strand High Court Pet Oct 13 Ord Dec 14

CHARLTON, SAMUEL, Nunney, Somerset, Baker Frome Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13

COOPER, WILLIAM, Bournemouth, Hotel Proprietor Poole
Ord Dec 14

CRICK, JOHN HNAY, Mildenhall, Suffolk, Shopkeeper
Bury St Edmunds Pet Dec 14 Ord Dec 14
DENTON, FREDERICK, and JOSEPH ALLEN, Irthlingborough,
Boot Manufacturers Northampton Pet Dec 15 Ord

Dec 15

FAWCETT, CHARLES ARTHUR, Dewsbury Leeds Pet Dec 15 Ord Dec 15

FORSTER, JOHN CLARK, Gt Tower st, Wholesale Spice Merchant High Court Pet Nov 26 Ord Dec 11 FREUND, JOHANN PHILIPP, Stoke Newington, Boot Manufacturer High Court Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13 GAMBLE, BEN, Leicester, Builder Leicester Pet Dec 15 Ord Dec 15

GARDINER, GEORGE, Kingswood, Gloucester, Builder Bristol Pet Nov 26 Ord Dec 13

HALL, JOHN VOCE, Boston, Lines, Grocer Boston Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13

HALLETT, ALFRED, East Chelborough, Dorset, Blacksmith Yeovil Pet Nov 30 Ord Dec 14

HILL, ROBERT, Darlington, Clerk Stockton on Tees Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13

JENKINS, JOHN, Penrhiwceiber, Glam, Stationer Pontypridd Pet Dec 14 Ord Dec 14

JOHNSON, HARRY, Teddington, Cycle Agent Kingston, Surrey Pet Dec 9 Ord Dec 15

JONES, ALFRED, Lyminster Brighton Pet Nov 24 Ord
Dec 15

JONES, FREDERICK TOPHAM, Niton, I W, Hotel Proprietor
Newport Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13
LONSDALE, WILLIAM, Southport, Provision Dealer Liver-
pool Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13
MACKIE, FRANK HECTOR, Kirkstead, Norfolk, Upholsterer's
Salesman Great Yarmouth Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13
MARTIN, HENRY, Twickenham Brentford Pet Dec 8
Ord Dec 10

MORGAN, JOHN, Canton, Cardiff, Labourer Cardiff Pet
Dec 10 Ord Dec 14

MORITZ, FREDERICK WILLIAM ADOLPH, Harlesden High Court Pet Dec 7 Ord Dec 13

NEWBY, JOSEPH WAKERLEY, Syston, Leicester, Wheelwright Leicester Pet Nov 27 Ord Dec 13 OZYER, JOHN WILLIAM, Roundhay, nr Leeds, Joiner Leeds

Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13
RICHARDSON, HENRY WILLIAM, Upper George st, Bryans-
ton rd, Pawnbroker High Court Pet July 28 Ord
Dec 13

SAPTE, WILLIAM, jun, Fittleworth, the Den, Sussex,
Journalist Brighton Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 15
SEAR, WILLIAM RICHARD, Harpole, Northampton, Inn-
keeper Northampton Pet Dec 10 Ord Dec 15
SIMPSON, FREDERICK WILLIAM, Eltisley, Hunts, Farmer
Peterborough Pet Dec 15 Ord Dec 15
STURGESS, WILLIAM LIONEL, Buckland,

Portsmouth

Grocer Portsmouth Pet Dec 9 Ord Dec 10 TALLBOY, JAMES EDWARD, Barry Dock, Auctioneer Cardiff Pet Dec 13 Ord Dec 13