Page images
PDF
EPUB

Anghwanneer ons tot 8 ag rys

Re BATT'S TRADE-MARKS. Romer, J. 21st April.
TRADE-MARK-REGISTRATION-

CASES OF LAST SITTINGS,
-Bona FIDE INTENTION OF USER, NECESSITY
FOR-NON-USER-RECTIFICATION OF REGISTER.

Court of Appeal.
Motion. This was an application to rectify the Register of Trade- Re MAYFAIR PROPERTY CO. (LIM.).

BARTLETT V. MAYFAIR Marks by removing therefrom the trade-marks above referred to. The trade-marks consisted of a butterfly with open wings, and the dates of LIMITED COMPANY – MORTGAGE OF UNCALLED CAPITAL – DEBENTURE

PROPERTY CO. (LIM.). No. 2.' 24th March, 1st April. their registration were March, 1882, and March, 1896, respectively. This

PRIORITY mark was registered in several classes, including class 42. The applicants

- WINDING-UP- UNSECURED CREDITORS COMPANIES ACT, had been refused registration of a mark of theirs by the Comptroller, on

1879 (42 & 43 Vict. c. 76), s. 5. the ground of its similarity to the respondent's mark, and the foundation Appeal by a debenture-holder in the above-named company from a of their present application was that the mark had never been used, or

decision of Wright, J. The appeal raised a question of great importintended to be used, by the respondents for any goods coming within ance in company law on the construction of section 5 of the Companies class 42. It was contended for the respondents that there was no juris- Act, 1879, which provides as follows: "An unlimited company may, by diction to alter a registration that had been properly made. The conclu

the resolution passed by the members when assenting to registration as a sions of fact arrived at by the court were that there had been no real user limited company under the Companies Acts, 1862 to 1879, and for the of the mark at any time before or since registration in respect of class purpose of such registration or otherwise, increase the nominal amount 42, and that, at the date of registration, there was no bond fide intention of its capital by increasing the nominal amount of each of its shares. of the respondents to use the mark for goods in that class. The following Provided always that no part of such increased capital shall be capable of enactments were referred to-viz., the Patents, Designs, and Trade being called up, except in the event of, and for the purposes of, the com, Marks Act, 1875, ss. 2 and 5, and rule 34 of the Rules of September, 1876, pany being wound up. And, in cases where no such increase of nominal for that Act; the Act of 1883, 88. 65, 70, 72, 75, 76, 90; and the Act capital may be resolved upon, an unlimited company may, by, such of 1888.

resolution as aforesaid, provide that a portion of its uncalled capital shall ROMER, J., said that it was clear that persons registering new trade

not be capable of being called up, except in the event of and for the marks which they said that they intended to use must have a bona fide purposes of the company being wound up: A limited company may, by intention to use them : see Edwards v. Dennis (30 Ch. D. 454, at fi already been called up shall not be capable of being called up, exceptia 474, 34 W. R. Dig. 197, per Cotton, L.J.). His lordship therefore held the event of and for the purposes of the company being wound up, and as the result of the above conclusions of fact that the registration was wrong and ought to be expunged, and ordered accordingly.--Counsel, thereupon such portion of capital shall not be capable of being called up, Neville, Q.C., and Austen-Cartmell ; Levett, Q.C., and Sebastian ; Ingle Joyce. exceptin the event of and for the purposes of the company being wound up: SOLICITORS, Mann f Taylor ; Shepheards ; Solicitor to Board of Trade.

The company was formed and registered as a limited company on the 16th

of August, 1892, with a nominal capital of £50,000 divided into 5,000 [Reported by J. F. Waley, Barrister-at-Law.}

shares of £10 each. The memorandum of association stated that one of its objects was to borrow money and issue debentures charged on "the property and rights of the company, both present and future, including

its uncalled capital.” By the articles of association full power was High Court-Queen's Bench Division.

given to the directors to issue debentures charging all the assets of the

company, including its uncalled capital. Before this power was exercised BAXTER v. LECHE AND OTHERS. Div. Court. 20th April.

- viz., on the 12th of October, 1892 -a special resolution was passed, and

it was thereby declared "that such portion of the company's capital as LICENSING Acts—NOTICE OF OBJECTION SERVED AFTER DATE OF ORIGINAL

consists of £5 per share remaining uncalled upon all the ordinary shares LICENSING MEETING, BUT IN DUE TIME BEFORE ADJOURNED MBETING of the company shall not be capable of being called up, except in the JURISDICTION OF JUSTICES TO Repuse Such Licence -LICENSING Act, event of and for the purpose of the company being wound up in accorda 1872 (35 & 36 VICT. C. 94), s. 42.

ance with the provisions of the Companies Act, 1879.” In June, 1894, it

was resolved by the directors to create and issue debentures for $50,000 This was a special case stated by the quarter sessions for the county bearing interest at 6 per cent , and 160 debentures for £100 each bearing of Chester on an appeal against the refusal of the justices sitting at the interest at 6 per cent. were created and issued accordingly under the seal adjourned general annual licensing meeting at Broxton to renew the of the company. By these debentures the company bound itself to pay licence, held by the appellant, Jane Baxter, in respect of the Brown Cow | the principal moneys and interest secured by them, and the company as public-house at Waverton. A notice of objection to the renewal of this beneficial owner charged with such payments “its undertaking and all licence had been served after the date of the original annual licensing its property whatsoever and wheresoever, both present and future, meeting, but in due time before the adjourned meeting, and the substantial including its uncalled capital for the time being.” At the time these question was whether the justices at quarter sessions could refuse the debentures were issued £4 58. per share had been called up. There licence, it being contended by the appellant that the respondents, the remained to be called up £5 15s. per share, of which, however, £5 could objectors, had no locus standi, as no notice of objection to the renewal of only be called up on the winding up of the company. On the 8th of the licence had been served seven days prior to the commencement of the August, 1896, an action was brought against the company by a debentura, general annual licensing meeting, and also that no notice of objection holder suing on behalf of himself and all other debenture-holders, and purporting to be served by the direction of the justices had been served on on the 12th of August he obtained judgment in the form usual in such the appellant. After hearing evidence at the adjourned annual meeting, actions and a receiver was appointed. On the same date the company was they being equally divided, the renewal was refused. The appellant ordered to be wound up and a liquidator was appointed.

By this time appealed to quarter sessions. The notice served by the clerk to the 158. of the £5 15s. before referred to as uncalled up when the debentures justices was in the following form : "On behalf of the licensing justices were issued bad been called up by the directors ; so that on the 12th of

I hereby give you notice to attend at the adjourned annual August, 1896, when the winding-up order was made, £5 per share had licensing meeting for the said division

when the renewal of the been called up by the directors and £5 more-i.e., the reserve capital – licence now held by you will be taken into consideration.”

only remained to be called up for the purposes of the company being The COURT, without calling on the counsel for the objectors, decided wound up. The liquidator had called on the contributories for payment that the refusal of the justices of quarter sessions must be upheld.

of this £5 per share. The assets of the company, including the WILLS, J., said the proviso in section 42 of the Licensing Act, 1872, was

reserve capital called up by the liquidator, would not be sufficient to in very wide terms. Under it the justices, notwithstanding that no

pay the costs of the winding up and the creditors of the company: notice had been given, might require the attendance of the licence-holder The question therefore arose whether the debentures created a valid first at the adjourned meeting, when the objection could be considered as if charge on the reserve capital so as to entitle the holders of them to the notice had been given. In this case, he thought, the appellant had payment out of that fund in priority to the other creditors and to the had sufficient notice of the objection given by persong other than the costs of the winding, up. In November, 1897, the plaintiff in the justices, though in that notice appeared ihe objection taken by the justices. determined, and Wright, J., determined it against the plaintiff, hilding The appellant knew perfectly well that the conviction indorsed on the licence was the ground upon which the objection would be based.

that the company had po power to create any charge on that portion of KENNEDY, J., concurred. He considered the justices had not done the event of and for the purposes of the company being wound up." The

its capital which by the Companies Act, 1879, could only be called up "in anything contrary to the Act. The notice given to the appellant by the plaintiff appealed. clerk to the justices was a proper notice, on the face of it purporting to come from the justices, of the date of the adjournment and that the dismissed the appeal.

The Court (LINDLEY, M.R., and Rigby and VAUGHAN WILLIAMS, L.JJ.) applicant was to attend. The appellant in fact attended, and although objection was taken that the notice was bad, her solicitor called and continued: The contention on the part of the appellant is that a limited

April 1.-LINDLEY, M.R., stated the facts as above set out, and examined his witnesses. He believed that no injustice had been done the company can validly charge its uncalled capital if authorized so to do by appellant, and therefore the only question before the court was whether its memorandum of association or by its articles ; and that the capital or there was any juriediction in the justices in such a state of facts to refuse. money which under the Act of 1879 can only be called up in the event of No good grounds had been established for impugning their jurisdiction, and for the purposes of the company being wound up, is part of the and their decision ought to be upheld. Appeal dismissed ; leave to capital of the company in the full and proper sense of that word ; and appeal granted.-COUNSEL, Clement Higgins, Q.o., and Trevor Lloyd ; E. H. that, there being no prohibition against creating charges upon it, the Lloyd ; s. Moss. SOLICITORS, Cunliffes & Davenport, for W. 8. Churton, power to create such charges necessarily follows. This argument is based Chester; Bower, Cotton, of 'Bower, for °R. H. Jackson, Chester; George on In re Pyle Works (38 W. R. 674, 44 Ch. D. 534), which finally settled Boydell, clerk to the justices.

that uncalled capital of a limited company governed by the Companies [Reported by ERSKINE REID, Barrister-at-Law.]

Act, 1862, could be validly charged in favour of particular persons. It is

further contended that the payment of the secured debts of a company is as much a purpose of the compauy as the payment of its other debts ; that there is no necessary implication requiring the court to hold reserve

High Court-Chancery Division. capital to be incapable of being charged with the payment of particular

NORTH v. PERCIVAL. Kekewich, J. 5th April. debts; and that it may be ruinous to a company to prevent it from VendoR AND PURCHASER - REPUDIATION OF CONTRACT BY VENDORS—WILFUL obtaining relief from perhaps temporary pressure by raising money on the security of its most valuable asset. Cogent as this argument is, I am

DEFAULT-INTEREST. convinced that it is unsound, and that to yield to it would defeat and not An action was brought by a purcbaser for the specific performance of carry out the purpose with which the Act of 1879 was passed. When In an agreement for the sale of certain freehold land. The vendors by their re Pyle Works (ubi supra) was decided I foresaw that the decision might be defence alleged that there was no complete and binding contract for the pressed further than I was prepared to go, and I pointed out that, in my purchase or sale of any land, and that if there was it was only made subopinion, it did not authorize mortgages of reserve capital formed under ject to certain approvals which had not been given. The vendors further tae Act of 1879. I adhere to that view now that I have carefully re-con- alleged that there had been a common mistake as to the quantity of the sidered it. In order properly to interpret any statute it is as necessary land agreed to be sold, and asked, if the agreement were held to constinow as it was when Lord Coke reported Heydon's case (3 Co. 7) to consider tute a binding contract, for rescission of the contract on the ground of how the law stood when the statute to be construed was passed; what mistake. It was provided by a clause in the agreemeut that if the purthe mischief was for which the old law did not provide ; and the remedy chase was not completed by the 6th of July, 1897, the purchase-money provided by the statute to cure that mischief. The Companies Act, 1879, was to bear interest at the rate of 4 per cent. from that day until actual was passed in order to remedy some defects in the law relating to completion. The minutes of the judgment of the court as drawn up by unlimited companies, which defects, although long known to lawyers, the registrar contained, inter alia, the following provisions: This court startled the public when the City of Glasgow Bank stopped payment in doth declare that the agreement constituted a binding contract between 1878. The members of unlimited companies were in this position. First, the purchaser and the vendors for the sale by the vendors to the purchaser they were liable to calls on their shares to their nominal amounts. This of the vendor's freehold land situate, &c, and that the same ought to be was the only liability which could be enforced by the company or by its specifically performed and carried into effect, and doth order and adjudge directors whilst the company was carrying on business. This liability, the same accordingly. And it is ordered that interest be computed at the but no liability beyond, was an asset of the company with which the rate of 4 per cent. per annum on the purchase-money for the land concompany could deal. But, secondly, in addition to this limited liability tained in the agreement from the 6th of July, 1897, when the same ought the members were under an unlimited liability to the creditors of the to bave been paid according to the terms of the agreement. This was a company, and this uplimited liability could be enforced by creditors, motion by the purchaser to vary the minutes, inter alia, by striking out the although it was not an asset of the company which the company or its order for the payment of interest on the purchase-money by the purdirectors could charge, alien, or dispose of in any way whatever to the chaser, it being contended on his behalf that the resistance of the vendors prejudice of any creditor. What was wanted was power to form a to specific performance and their repudiation of the contract amounted to company with a reserve capital which should be limited in amount, which wilful default on their part, which disentitled them to receive the should be available for creditors in the event of a winding-up, and interest. which should not be under the control of the directors any more than KEKEWICH, J.-The question here is, Does the repudiation of this con. the funds were which the creditors could obtain, but the direstors could tract by the vendors amount to wilful default on their part within the not under the old law. This amendment in the law was made by the Act authorities so that they cannot claim interest, notwithstanding the stipulaof 1879. It appears to me plain that section 5 was framed with a double tion in the contract giving them interest? There are no authorities object-viz., first, to preserve for the general creditors of the company precisely in point. I am of opinion, however, that the vendors in this case the funds which the members were liable to pay, but which the did not obstruct the purchaser so as to be guilty of wilful default, and I directors could not call up; and, secondly, to enable the members to think that the registrar was right in providing tắat that interest should be limit the amount of their liability on a winding-up to pay the creditors paid by the purchaser until completion. --CounsBL, Warrington, Q..., more than the amount preserved for them. Now, if the appellants and R. Rowlands ; Renshaw, Q.C, and Christopher James. SOLICITORS, contention is right the first of these objects will be entirely defeated, Morley, Shirreff, & Co.; Clarke, Rawlins, & Co., for Percival & Son, Peteralthough there is not a sign of any intention on the part of the Legisla- borough. ture to effect so great a change in the law, and although such a change

[Reported by C. C. HENSLEY, Barrister-at-Law.] would or might be ruinous to the great body of a company's creditors and be destructive of the credit which the preservation intact of Re BROOKE AND FREMLIN'S CONTRACT. Kekewich, J. 26th March.

capital gives those companies which avail them. selves of the Act of 1879. To effect such a change in VENDOR AND PURCHASER—MORTGAGBE-MARRIED WOMAN—ConveyANCE TO the law applicable to unlimited companies which avail them

PURCHASER-CONCURRENCE OF HUSBAND-ACKNOWLEDGMENT. selves of the Act of 1879 some provision is wanted to confer on Summons under the Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1874, by the vendor of companies carrying on business power to deal with what the members are freehold property, asking for a declaration that the concurrence of the only liable to pay when the winding up takes place. Such a power husband of the mortgagee, who was a married woman, in the deed of conwould be a complete novelty, and cannot be inferred from the absence of veyance to the purchaser was not necessary, and that such deed did not any words probibiting it. I have dwelt on the effect of the Act of 1879 on require acknowledgment by her. The facts were as follows: In 1895 the unlimited companies, which take the benefit of it because the effect on vendor, E. C. Brooke, had mortgaged the property in fee to a Mrs. them and the effect on limited companies are to be gathered from the Theobald, a married woman, to secure the sum of £150 and interest use of exactly similar language. It was obviously desirable to enable advanced by her and forming part of her separate estate. Subsequently companies originally formed and registered as limited companies to have E. C. Brooke contracted to sell the property to the purchaser, Mr, reserve capitals and not to confine that advantage to unlimited companies Fremlin. In his requisitions on title, the purchaser, relying upon the registering themselves as limited companies. The object of the last part case of Re Harkness and Allsopp's Contract (44 W. R. 683; 1896, 2 Ch. 358), of the section is exactly the same as the object of the first part. Both required that Mrs. Theobald's husband should concur in the conveyance classes of companies are put on the same footing so far as reserve capital and that the deed should be acknowledged by her. The vendor conseis concerned. The prohibition against calling up the reserve capital in quently took out the present summons, and it was contended on his the case of limited companies is inserted for precisely the same purpose as behalf that the case relied on by the purchaser only applied to a married in the case of unlimited companies- viz., to preserve such capital for the woman as trustee, and not as mortgagee. general purposes of the company when wound up. To interpret the section KEKEWICH, J.-The point raised is a new one, and counsel have not been so as to enable a company to defeat this object by pledging or otherwise able to refer to any case nearer to the point than that of Re Harkness and disposing of its reserve capital is, in my opinion, entirely to miss the real Allsopp's Contract before North, J. That was a case of a married woman meaning of the Legislature as expressed in the language it has used. trustee, and the decision seems to go entirely on the fact that the property Neither the Act of 1879 nor the other Companies Acts give a company which she had was property of which she was a trus tee-not a bare power to dispose of assets which cannot come into existence until it is trustee--and therefore on that ground, and on that ground only, she was wound up. To hand over the reserve capital or any part of it when not a married woman entitled to separate property to whom the provisions called up to a prior assignee, or to a mortgagee who has no claim against of the Married Women's Property Act, 1882, apply. That is how I underthe assets until he has realized or given up his security, is not to apply the stand the decision. It seems only to go to that state of things, and to reserve capital for the purposes of the company being wound up within apply it to any other case one has to consider whether the married the true meaning of that expression as used in section 5, but to prevent woman is a trustee. If once you get a married woman who is merely a such application. This was the view of Wright, J., and it is mine also. bare trustee, then under section 16 of the Trustee Act, 1893, she can With respect to the case of Newton v. Debenture-holders, gc., of Anglo- convey and surrender as if she were a feme sole. But here she is not a bare Australian Investment Co. (43 W. R. 401 ; 1895, A. C. 244), on which trustee, for the principal, interest, and costs have not been paid, and counsel for the appellant so much relied, I need only observe that it was therefore she has not been denuded of her beneficial interest in the pronot a decision on the Act of 1879, but a decision on an article of associa- perty. Then can she, as mortgagee, notwithstanding Re Harkness and tion, so worded as not preserve, nor indeed to shew any intention to Allsopp's Contract, re-convey without the concurrence of her husband ? preserve, the reserve capital for the benefit of the general creditors in the Is she a trustee within the meaning of that decision ? Now, in order to event of liquidation. I cannot regard that case as an authority against create a trust you must have three things-namely, the person who is a the view which I take of the Act of 1879. The appeal must be dismissed trustee, the person or class of persons who form the cestuis que trustent, with costs.

and the property which the trustee holds on behalf of the cestui que trust. RIGBY, L.J., concurred.

There is no difficulty in a case of this kind in finding a possible trustee and VAUGHAN WILLIAMS, L.J., gave judgment to the same effect. Appeal cestui que trust--namely, the mortgagee and mortgagor, but what does the dismissed.-COUNSEL, Svinfen"Eady, Q.o., and R. F. Norton ; Parwell, mortgagee hold in trust for the mortgagor? That question does not seem Q.C., and George Henderson. SOLICITORS, Munns s Longden, Mackrell, to me to be capable of an answer in favour of the purchaser's view. The Maton, Godlee, & Quincey.

mortgagee is not a trustee for the mortgagor-that is, not until the [Reported by W. SAALLOROSS GODDARD, Barrister-at-Law.]

principal, interest, and costs due under the mortgage have been satisfied,

reserve

to

m

when that has been done he holds it to some extent in a fiduciary char Mr. Thomas Marshall and Mr. C. H. Morton were re-elected Honorary acter. Until payment he is not a trustee of the property for the mort- Secretary and Assistant Honorary Secretary respectively. gagor; the relation between them is that of mortgagor and mortgagee, County Court Rules.- The Hon. Sec. reported that as directed by the resolunot that of trustee and cestui que trust. The money advanced belongs to tions of the meetings of the 12th March and 13th July last he had communicated the mortgagee, who holds the security for his own benefit, and in this to the Lord Chancellor and to the President of the Incorporated Law Society, respect the fiduciary character does not come in for a moment. It seems as a member of the Rule Committee, the objections raised by members of the me, therefore, that it is not right to say that the mortgagee is a association to the rules of March and May, 1897, so far as they related to trustee, and that is what I have to conclude in order to distinguish this obtaining leave under Section 74 of the County Courts Act, 1888 (Order V. case from Re Harkness and Allsopp's Contract. The result is that this lady Rule 9al) and to the procedure under Order VII.a Rule 4, and that he had can deal with the security, including the legal estate in the land, as if she also pointed out that the proposed new Forms of Affidavits wera un. were a feme sole, and the purchaser will get a complete title without the necessarily complex, and would be found in practice inconvenient and concurrence of her husband or the acknowledgment of the deed.--Counsel, misleading. He stated the specific points in the rules to which objection was Tarrington, Q.O., and Greenwood; Ashton Cross. Solicitors, E. C. taken and the nature of the objection. The following Resolation was moved Rawlings g Butt; William Webb g C.

by Mr. Fybus, seconded by Mr. Witherington, and adopted :-"That this [Reported by R. J. A. MORRISON, Barrister-at-Law.]

Association approves of the action of the Hon. Sec. and authorises him to continue to act in the sense of the Resolutions of March and July, 1897, and to report if necessary or desirable.”

Stamps on Sales or Transfers of Mortgages.—The Assistant Honorary

Secretary reported that a joint deputation from this association, and from LAW SOCIETIES.

the Incorporated Law Society of the United Kingdom, had conferred with

Mr. Gore, the Solicitor for the Board of Commissioners of Inland Revenue, INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY.

with a view to an indemnity being given in respect of such transfers of meeting, held July 15th, 1881, to the effect that meetings of the society the interpretation now put by the commissioners upon some sections of the

In pursuance of the resolution passed at the adjourned annual general mortgage, conveyances subject to chief rents, and grants reserving rents to a members of the society will be held in the hall of the society on Friday, introduction into the next Finance Act of a clause to effect this object, and the 29th inst., at two o'clock precisely, to consider the subjects hereinafter that Mr. Wolstenholme was now engaged in settling the draft clause. mentioned. Mr. Harvey Clifton will move : "That the Council of the Incorporated

District Probate Registries.-The Hon. Sec. reported that he had called Law Society (U.K.) should take steps to obtain a repeal of Section 47 of the the attention of members of the association to the resolution of the 13th Solicitors Act of 1843, which provides that this Act shall not extend or be July, 1897. (Minutes, p. 596), and had by circular dated 22nd July last construed to extend to the examination, admission, rights, or privileges of requested them to communicate to him any information which they might any persons appointed to be S»licitors to the Treasury and other Government Hampshire Law Society disapproving of Probate Registrars acting in their

think desirable, and that he had received two replies only, one from the offices."

pir. William Melmoth Walters will move that the fellowing resolution, in own Courts, either properly or as agents, and one from the Liverpool Law reference to the Law Society's Club, passed at the Special General Meeting Society to the effect that the practice complained of was not adopted to any on the 28th of January last, be confirmed-viz. :-(1) That the following extent in their own Registry, and that under these circumstances he had addition be made at the end of Rule 3: but the Committee shall bave power not taken any further steps in the matter. at their discretion to suspend or reduce the entrance fee for any period or for

County Courts : Default Summons. — Mr. Edmonds, on behalf of the any class of Members, and also to reduce the annual subscription payable by Hampshire Law Society, moved the following resolution :--" That with a Members or any class of Members. (2) That the following addition be made view of expediting the obtaining of judgment in undefended cases in County at the end of Rule 4: but such subscription may be reduced by the Com-Courts it is expedient that in the case of default summonses or a sum of mittee as before mentioned.' (3) 'That the words if any' be inserted in $5 and upwards, defendants, as a condition precedent to being allowed to Rule 6 after the words 'Entrance Fee,' and in Rule 1 after the words defend, should be required to satisfy the Registrar ex parte on oath or by • Entrance Fees.'

affidavit that they have a prima facie defence, and that failing their so doing Dr. Charles Ford will ask the President what steps, if any, the Council the plaintiffs in such cases shall be at liberty to enter judgment.” After have taken to give effect to the resolution of the society with regard to considerable discussion this resolution was carried by a large majority. shortening the Long Vacation, and also whether the Council are taking any

Presiding Officers' Fees at School Board Elections. – Mr. Porter of steps to secure the transaction of legal business during the Long Vacation other Blackburn, on behalf of the Bradford Law Society, moved the following than that which is at present allowed to be transacted during the Vacation. resolution :-“That the reduced remuneration of $2 now offered to solicitors

Mr. Charles Ford will move :-"That a copy of the record of attendances for presiding at School Board Elections is quite inadequate compensation (for the current year) of members of the Council, at council and committee for the work done, having regard to the long hours attendant on and the meetings, be sent annually to every member of the Society, such copy to responsibilities of the office, and that the fee of £3 38, should be maintained. accompany the notice calling tbe annual general meeting."

That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Incorporated Law Society, Mr. Charles Ford will move: “That the interests of suitors and the due with a request that the council will make a representation to the Education administration of justice require that motions in the Courts of the Chancery Department with a view to a rovision of the scale. This resolution gave rise Division ought to be set down in a list, and taken in the order in which to considerable differənce of opinion. A majority dissuaded any action they appear in such list, no precedence being given to leaders of the Bar."

being taken, on the ground that in the country competent persons not being Mr. Charles Ford will move: “ This meeting is of opinion that the mem

solicitors can without difficulty be got to do the work, and that this being 80 bers of the Council going out of cffice every year shall decide b:tweea is would be useless and therefore inexpedient to address the Education thom£elves as to which three of them shall not be eligible for re-election for Department with the view of attempting to induce them to revise the scale. a period of one year; and in the event of non-compliance of such condition,

Advertisements by Solicitors — At the request of the President of the the selection shall be made by the Council, and the result in either case shall Incorporated Law Society the Hon. Sec. mentioned that questions had arisen be communicated to the members of the society, and the Council is hereby as to the propriety of solicitors inserting advertisements in the newspapers directed to amend the Bye-lows accordingly."

in their own names for loans and securities, and that the opinion of the members of the association was requested. The matter was directed to

stand over until the next meeting in order that notice of it might be given. THE ASSOCIATED PROVINCIAL LAW SOCIETIES.

A vote of thanks to the Chairman concluded the business of the meeting.
The annual meeting of the above societies was held at the Law Institution,
Chancery Lane, London, on Friday, the 1st April, 1898, Mr. R. Ellett, of

SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION,
Crencester, in the chair.
There were present the undermentioned societies, represented as follows:-

The usual monthly meeting of the board of directors of this association The Liverpool Incorporated Law Society, Mr. C. H. Morton ; the Manchester

was held at the Law Institution, Chancery-lane, on Wednesday, the 20th Iacorporated Law Association, Mr. W. H. Norton; the Newcastle-upon- inst., Mr. Henry Morten Cotton in the chair. The other directors present Type Incorporated Law Socictý, Mr. R. Pybus; the Yorkshire Law Society, being : Messrs. W. F. Blandy (Reading), Grantham R. Dodd, Samuel Mr. J. T. Atkinson ; the Somerset Law Society, Mr. J. E. W. Wakefield; Harris (Leicester), John Hunter, R. W. Merriman (Marlborough), F. the Berks, Bucks, and Oxfordshire Incorporated Law Society, Mr. D. H! Rowley Parker, Richard Pennington, J.P., Henry Roscoe, Sidoey Smith, Witherington and Dr. P.J. Ratland; the Bristol Incorporated Law Society, Frank W. Stone (Tunbridge Wells), F. T. Woolbert, and J. T. Scott Mr. W.O. H. Cross; the Hampshire Law Society, Mr. G. W. Edmonds; } (secretary): the Nottingham Incorporated Law Society, Mr. J. Kentish Wright; the

A sum of £400 was distributed in grants of relief, eight new members Chester and North Wales Incorporated Law Society, Mr. R. Farmer; the

were admitted to the association, and other general business transacted. Sheffield Law Society, Mr. E. Bramley; the Blackburn Law Society, Mr. George Porter and Mr. J. Travis-Cook ; the Shropshire Law Society, Mr. Rowland T. Hughes; the Gloucestershire and Wiltshire Incorporated Law Society, Mr. R. Ellett and Mr. E. C. Sewell.

The following is the rota of attendance of the Queen's Bench Masters at The Hon. Sec. reported that the Bradford Law Society had joined the association during the year, and that the Leeds and Wakefield Law Societies Wednesdays, and Fridaye, Master Kaye; Tuesdays, Thursdays, and

Chambers during the Easter Sittings, viz. :-A to F division : Mondays had retired. The number of the members of the assoctation was 49. Saturdays, Master Pollock. G to N division : Mondays, Wednesdays, and

The subscriptions for the year was fixed at the same rate as in the previous Fridays, Master Butler ; Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, Master year.

Walton. 0 to z division : Mondaya, Wednesdays, and Fridays, Master The accounts for the year were presented, and having been audited and Wilberforce ; Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Siturdays, Master Manley found correct, were approved and adopted.

Smith.

LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL.

LEGAL NEWS.
COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION.

OBITUARY.
The awards upon the Easter Pass Examination held at the Inner Temple
on March 29, 30, and 31 are as follows:-

Many of our readers will hear with great regret of the death of Mr. Pass CERTIFICATES.

ALFRED Cock, Q.C., on Wednesday last, at the residence of his brother. He LINCOLN's Inn.- Noshirvan B. Behramje, Krishnaji W. Bhat, Brij B. L. travelled to Shrewsbury to spend his Easter holidays, and on Monday week Bisya, Arthur P. Braybrooke, William J. H. Brodrick, Henry I.'C. Brown, caught a chill, which resulted in pneumonia. Mr. Cock was the second son Devi Dayal, Anthony De Freitas, Charles Dixon, Everar. w. Fichardt, of Mr. James Cock, of Shrewsbury. He was called to the Bar in 1871, and Bolton C. Jones, Sam S. Kay, Abdul Karim Khan, Rahimkhan Karim Khan, became a Queen's Counsel in 1886, and was well known as an able and Surendra Lal Khastgir, Beni Parshad Khosla, Jayavant Dinanath Madgavkar, vigorous advocate. He was a man of cool judgment and great resource in Harcourt Gladstone Malcolm, Alexander Manson, Behari Lal Merh, the conduct of cases, in spite of his somewhat breezy style of advocacy. His Richard C. Pearman, William G. Randles, Charles K. Rayson, Syed geniality and good nature made him very popular with his brethren Mohamed Shere, Moses A. Williams, and William V. G. Willoughby.

at the Bar, and he will be greatly missed. He was under 50 years of INNER TEMPLE. - Arthar J. Alison, Robert W. Allen, James F. Anderson, age. Stanley B. Atkinson, William E. C. Baynes, Percy B. Brooks, Charoon, The death is announced of Mr. James HENRY Nelson, barrister. He Isaac R. Davies, Francis J. Dessain, Warwick H. Draper, John S. Gibbs, served in the Madras Civil Service from 1861 to 1887, and was successively Samuel F. Goch, Edward Higinbotham, Alfred A. Hildesheimer, Cecil A. assistant collector and magistrate, Acting Registrar of the High Court and Hunt, Henry W. Jephson, Edward B. Joy, Arthur M. Labouchere, John Small Court Cause Judge, and subsequently from 1872 Civil and Sessions H. Layton, Charles B. Martin, George T. Martin, Reginald T. H. Milton, Judge. In 1871 he was called to the Bar. He was mainly known by his Richard S. C. Nolan, Pestonjee Sorabjee Patuck, Frank Perrott, Charles J. books entitled “ A View of the Hindu Law as Administered by the High M. Russell, the Hon. Victor A. F. V. Russell, Henry H. Stebbing, Court of Madras" and "The Scientific Study of the Hindu Law.” After Thorold A. Stewart-Jones, Ernald R. Warre, and Mark Waterlow.

his retirement from the Civil Service he practised for some years in
MIDDLE TEMPLE.-Henry L. H. Andrews, Frank Brough, William A. F. Hyderabad, and conducted the Indian Jurist.
Balfour-Browne, Herbert Burr, Alfred P. Carryer, James D. Chorlton,
Stephen 0. Henn Collins, George G. Coulter, Herbert E. Crook, Walter P.

APPOINTMENTS.
Dodge, Ignatius S. Ferreira, Carlton Hackney, John Hall, jun., William G.
Hannah, Percy A. Harris, FitzRoy Hemphill, Hendrik J. Hugo, Vyvyan A.

Mr. C. J. AUGUSTUS WALTON, solicitor, of the firm of Messrs. Helder, Lyons, Georges E. Nairac, Vasudeo Ramkrishna Pandit, Erasmus D. Parker, Roberts, & Walton, solicitors, of 2, Verulam-buildings, Gray's-inn, Abdul Rasul, Frank L. Riseley, Alexander E. Rogers, Arthur H. Walsh, London, and of Leytonstone, Essex, has been appointed a Commissioner Michael P. Walsh, Edward T. Č. Werner, and William M'K, Young.

to Administer Oaths. Mr. Walton was admitted in March, 1892. GRAY's Inn.-Edward J. S. Athawes, William E. Barber, Madhu Sudan Bhagat, Charles M., Brousson, Laurence J. Byrne, Mohammad Said Hakim,

CHANGES IN PARTNERSHIPS. Gaston Johnston, Charles H. Leach, Noel Middleton, Pagadala Rungiah Naidu, Des Raj Sabni, Stadi-Lal, Subharama Swaminadhan, Rastamji London, has taken into partnership Mr. W. GIPPS Kent, solicitor, late of

Mr. J. PARKER Ayers, solicitor, of 61, Carey-street, Lincoln's-inn, Kharshedji Tarachand, and Walter M. Thorburn. The number examined was 133. Of the 33 candidates who failed, seven

Furnival's-inn, Holborn. The name of the firm will be Parker Ayers & were postponed until the Michaelmas examination, 1898, and four until the Kent, and the business will be carried on at No. 11, Gray’s-inn-place Hilary examination, 1899.

Holborn.

DISSOLUTIONS.
The following passed in Constitutional Law and Legal History only :-
LINCOLN's Inn.-Merwanji Rustomji Boyce, Richard C. Brown, William

WILLIAM ROBERT Davies and DAVID OSWALD Davies, solicitors, DolM. Carter, Robert S. Clease, Hamilton H. M. Dent, Ivan Chen, Fitzherbert gelley, Barmouth, and Towyn (W. R. Davies & Co.). April 5. The said G. Knight, and Rowland Williams.

David Oswald Davies will henceforth carry on practice at the above INNER TEMPLE.—Kington Baker, Frederick Belfield, John E. Clauson, places.

[Gazette, April 15. William G. H. Gritten, Herbert F. Guinness, Jijaba Bajaram Patil Mohite, Hugh G. Newton, Harold T. Perkins, and Arthur L. B. Thesiger.

GENERAL.
MIDDLE TEMPLE.—Kanji Premji Dodia, Ernest A. Ebblewhite, James
Fairbairn, Joseph E. Lilley, Francis 0. Lindley, John A. Moore, Owen

"A Magistrate” writes to the Times on the Criminal Evidence Bill, Moses, Julius E. Pitcher, Maurice I. V. M. J. Théry, Frederick J. Willis, pointing out that some dozens of charges are daily made by the police in and Hugo Worthington.

the metropolitan police-courts in which no solicitor or counsel appears on Gray's Inn.-George W. Clarke, Edward H. Coumbe, Raghubar Dayal, in the nature of an accusation against the police. Under the proposed Act

either side. In almost all these cases the defendants make some statement Anandarai Bapubhai Majmundar, Charles F. Rorke, Laxmidass Rowji Sapat, these defendants will make these accusations upon oath. Is it proposed that Harichund Nathubhoy Shah, Carleton S. Smith, Cullyanji Murarji Thacker, the policeman shall cross-examine or not? Either alternative seems to be and Manilal Umedram Thakore. Of 63 who were examined, 38 passed. Six candidates were ordered not to there are usually about fifty charges to be disposed of, and these generally

equally monstrous. On Monday, at most of the metropolitan police-courts, be admitted for examination again until the Michaelmas examination, 1898, take till about 3 or 4 o'clock, sometimes later. * Applications and summonses and one not until the Hilary examination, 1899. The following passed in Römin Law and Constitutional Law and Legal double the length of most cases, and will necessitate some very great

have also, as far as possible, to be heard. The proposed Act will at least History :

LINCOLN'S INx:- Harold F. Bidder, George L. Craik, Arthur C. Curtis, change in the arrangement of the business of metropolitan policeand Herbert G. Smith. INNER TEMPLE.-Aubrey T. Lawrence, William Singer, Alexander N.

Sir John Scott, who is about to resign his post as Judicial Adviser to the Tayler, Ernest J. Welfare, and Thomas A. Wbite.

Egyptian Government, is, says the St. Janes's Gazette, one of the Englishmen MIDDLE TEMPLE. - Charles R. Brigstocke, Archibald O. Connell, Allen C.

who will undoubtedly be entitled to rank with such men as Colonel Edwards, and Ernest Lesser.

Moncrieff and Lord Cromer as one of the makers of modern Egypt. At the GRAY's Inn.-Philip J. Macdonell and Herbert W. Prichard.

time of the British occupation, early in the eighties, the administration of Of 33 examined 15 passed. Two candidates were ordered not to be justice was corrupt and disorganised, and the task which confronted Mr. admitted for examination again uotil the Hilary examination, 1899.

Scott, as he then was, presented what to any but a level-headed, clear. The following passed in Roman Law:

sighted English lawyer would have seemed insuperable difficulties. With LINCOLN's Inn. -Donald F. Alderson, Alfred L. Cohn, George S. Cowie, undaunted courage, however, Mr. Scott set to work, and his reforms, though John B. Dyne, Francis A. Hazeland, Arthur W. Howe, Indrajit Kalabhai, drastic and wide-sweeping, have nevertheless been such as to secure the William M. Muir Mackenzie, William N. Marcy, John R. Prior, Goolam whole-hearted appreciation and approval of native as well as foreign litigants. Fazulbhoy Visram, and Robert B. Wilkinson.

He was the son of a Wigan solicitor, was called to the Bar in 1865, and INNER TEMPLE. —Alfred B. Cairnes, Edward H. Chapman, Bernard N.

" went” the Northern Circuit. In 1874 he was appointed a Judge of Fraser, Edward S. Hart, Francis W. Hirst, Sydney Philips, Bernard v. 0. Appeal in the International Court of Appeal in Egypt, and was ViceRansome, John H. Stamp, and Charles H. Wise.

President of the court from 1880 to 1882. From the latter year until 1890 MIDDLE TEMPLE.– Henry A. G. Bohn, Peter J. Bɔland, Charles Bray,

Mr. Scott was a Judge of the Supreme Court of Bombay. In 1890 he D[ilkhi Ram Chordry, James K. Hay, David S. Hodge, s. John E. B. returned to Egypt as Judicial Adviser to the Khedive, which office he is Macglashan, Laurence L. Rostron, John Sanderson, William Sellers, leave of absence in the summer than the rules of the Egyptian service

now resigning, as his long residence in hot climates renders necessary more Bakhshi Sain Das Sethy, and Leonard E. Smith.

Gray's Inn.—Johndra Nath Bonnerjee, Fielding Gill, Seth P. Lewis- allow.
Jones, Guru Das Nanda, Jaishi Ram, Sirdir Foujdar Singh, Edward J.
Steegmann, Arthur B. Sully, and Henry S. Williams.

The seventy-second annual general meeting of the Standard Life of 57 examined 42 passed. Six candidates were ordered not to be Assurance Co. was held at Edinburgh on Tuesday, the 19th of April, admitted for examination until the Michaelmas examination, 1898, and one 1898. The following results for the year ended 15th of November, 1897, candidate not until the Hilary examination, 1899.

were reported : 4,738 policies were issued, assuring £1,844,087; the total existing assurances in force at 15th of November, 1897, amounted to

£23,919,754; the claims by death during the year amounted, including Among those who have accepted the invitation of the Treasurer and bonus additions, to £575,168; the revenue for the year ended 15th of Beachers of the Middle Temple to dine with them on "Grand Day." of November, 1897, amounted to £1,123,013; and the accumulated funds at Easter Term, on Thursday, May 5th, are the American Ambassador, the Lord same date amounted to £8,804, 722, being an increase during the year of Chancellor, the Duke of Fife, and Mr. A. J. Balfour, M.P.

£356,419.

Wed. ........

...............25

.............28

.29

25

Wednesday 20 General paper

Mon., May 2...Sitting in chambers

Friday, May 27, will be the last day of Tuesday 3

which® Notice of Motion can be given COURT PAPERS.

4

without special leave. Thursday 5 Acts with wits

Eaturday-Short Causes and Petitions will
SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE.

Friday
6

be taken on Saturdays, April 23 and Saturday 7

May 14.
ROTA OF REGISTRARS IN ATTENDANCE ON

Monday...... 9.Sitting in chambers The Business for the other Saturdays will
APPEAL COURT Mr. Justice
Date.

Mr. Justice

General paper
No. 2.

Wednesday 11 )

be from time to time a 70 ucd in the
NORTH.
STIBLING.

Daily Ca ise List.
Monday, April
Mr. Lavie

Mots for Romer, J, and
Mr. Ward
Mr. Carrington Thursday ...12

Actions for Trial with Witnesses will be Tuesday

gen pa
................. 26

Pugh
Pemberton

Jackson
Wednesday

taken on Tuesday, April 26, and con-
Lavie
.....................27

Friday ......13... Mots and adj sums
Ward

Carrington
Thursday ...

tinued until the end of the following
Pugh
Pemberton

Sht caus, pets (including
Jackson

week.
Saturday ...113 unopposed pets for Romer,

Motions and Uaopposed PetiFriday ...........

Lavie
Ward
Carrington

tions will be heurd during that period Saturday..

(J.), fur cons, and adj sums
...30
Pugh
Pemberton

Jackson
Monday ....16 Sitting in chambers

by Mr. Justice Stirling.
Mr. Justice

Tuesday ...17
Mr. Justice

Mr. Justice
Wed.

General paper
.18

Actions for Trial with Witnesses will also
KEKEWICH.

ROMER.
BYBNE.
Mots for Romer, J, and

be taken at other times. Notice will be Monday, April

Thursday ...19
.25 Mr. Rolt

Mr. Beal
Mr. Farmer

gen pa

given in the Daily Cause List. Tuesday

26
Godfrey
Leach

King
Friday ......20...Mots and adj sums

Mr. Justice Stirling's Motions and UnWednesday.

.27
Rolt
Beal
Farmer

Sht caus, pets (including
Thursday

opposed Petitions will be taken in this .....................28

Godfrey
Leach

King
Saturday .. 21 { unopposed pets for Romer,

Court while he is heiring Witness Friday ...............................29

Rolt
Beal
Farmer
J.), fur cons, and adj surns

Actions-viz., on Thursdays, May 12 and Saturday ..........................30

Godfrey
Leach
King Monday......23...Sitting in chambers

19.
Tuesday .24
Wednesday 25 General paper

Thursday ...26
EASTER SITTINGS, 1898.

Friday ..27...Mots and adj sums

CHANCERY Court III. COURT OF APPEAL.

Wednesday 20

New trial paper
Thursday ...21
Any cause intended to be heard as a short

MR. JUSTICE BYRNE.
APPEAL COURT II.

cause must be so marked in the cause
Friday

.22
( Bkcy apps and new trial
book at least one clear day before the

Actions transferred for Trial or Hearing Final and interlocutory appeals from the

paper
Saturday .. 23.. New trial paper

same can be put in the paper to be so

only will be taken in the order in the Chancery, and Probate, Divorce, and

heard. Two copies of minutes of the

Cause List on every day of the Sittings, Admiralty Divisions (Probate and DiApp motns ex pte-orgl proposed judgment or order must be left

from April 19 to May 27, both invoroe), and the County Palatine and

mots - apps from ords
in court with the judge's clerk the day

clusive.
Stannaries Courts.
Monday......25 made on interlocutory mots

before the cause is to be put in the paper. and Q B final apps if re

Business in the Liverpool and Manchester
App motns ex pte-org?

quired
When witness actions can be taken on any District Registries will be taken as

follows:
mots-apps from ords made Tuesday ..26

days other than those appointed, due Tues., Apr. 19 on interlocutory mots (sep Wednesday 27 Q B final apps

notice will be given.

Motions, Short Causes, Petitions, and list) and Chan final apps if Thursday ...28

Adjourned Summonses on every other required

Friday.
( Bkcy apps and Q B final

Friday, commencing with Friday, April Wednesday 20...Chan final

29
apps
apps

22. Thursday ...21

Saturday ...30...0 B final
apps
LORD CHANCELLOR'S COURT.

Summonses in Chambers on every other
Friday .22
Saturday ....23y Chan final apps

App motns ex pte-orgl
MR. JUSTICE STIRLING.

Saturday commencing with Saturday, Monday mots — apps from ords

April 21. * Tuesday ...26

Mon., May 2 made on interlocutory mots Tues., Apr. 19...Mots, adj sums, and gen pa
App motns ex pte-orgl

and new trial paper if
mots-apps from ords made

required
Thursday ...21

CHANCERY COURT II. Wednesday 27 on interlocutory mots (sep Tuesday...... 3

Friday ......22 Mots, adj sums, and gen pa
list) and Chan final apps if
Wednesday 4 New trial paper

Sht caus, pets, adj sums, &

Saturday ...23
Thursday

ME. JUSTICE ROMER,
required
5

gen på "Thursday ...28

Friday

( Bkcy apps and new trial Monday......25...Sitting in chambers
6
paper

Tuesday ...26
Friday ......29

Tues., Apr. 19...Mots and non wit list Saturday 7...New trial paper

General paper
Saturday ...30

Wednesday 27
Chan final

apps
Mon., May 2
App motns ex pte -orgl Thursday ...28 Mots for Kekewich, J, and Thursday ...21} Witness list

Friday .22 Mots and non wit list Tuesday 3

gen pa
apps from ords
Friday .29...Mots, adj sums, and gen pa Saturday

Pets, sht caus, procedure
App motns ex pte-org! Monday...... 9 made on interlocutory mots

233 sums, opposed pets, and

Sht caus, pets (including
mots -apps from ords made
and Q B final appeals if

non wit list Wednesday 4

unopposed pets for Keke-
required
on interlocutory mots (sep

Saturday .30
wich, J), adj gums, and

Monday......23...Sitting in chambers list) and Chan final apps if Tuesday,

Tuesday..

gen pa)
required
Wednesday 11 Q B final apps

Witness list

Wednesday 27 )
Mon., May 2... Sitting in chambers
Thursday
County Palatine apps and
Thursday

Mots for North, J, ani 3

Tuesday
5
Bkcy apps and Q B final

Thursday ...28
Chan final apps

General paper
Friday

wit list
Wednesday 4)

apps Friday

Friday .29...Mots and non wit list 6

Mots for Kekewich, J, and
Saturday ...14...Q B final apps

Thursday 5
Saturday

Pets, sht caus, opposed 7 Chan final apps

gen på Monday...... 9 App motns ex pte-orgl Friday 6. Mots, adj sums, and gen pa Saturday ...30

pets, procedure sums, and Tuesday ...10

mots
apps from ords
Sht caus, pets (including

non wit list, including unApp motns ex pte-org! Monday......16 made on interlocutory mots

opposed pets for North, J unopposed pets for Keke

Saturday 7 and new trial paper if re

wich, J), adj sums, and mots-apps from ords made

Mon., May 2. Sitting in chambers quired

Tuesday Wednesday 11 on interlocutory mots (sep

gen pa

Witness list

Wednesday 41
Tuesday ...17
list) and Chan final apps

Monday...... 9... Sitting in chambers
Wednesday 18 New trial paper
if required

Tuesday

| Mots for North, J, and 10

Thursday 5
Thursday ...19
Wed.

wit list

.11 Thursday ...12

Friday

6...Mots and non wit list Friday

Friday

Bkcy apps and new trial Thursday ...12 Witness actions .20

Pets, sht caus, procedure paper

Friday

..13
Saturday ...14 Chan final appe
Saturday ... 21...New trial paper
Saturday ...14

Saturday 7

sums, opposed pets, and Monday ....16

non wit list, including un

Monday......16...Sitting in chambers
Tuesday ...17
App motns ex pte--org! Tuesday ...17

opposed pets for North, J
mots
App motns ex pte-orgl Monday... 23 made on interlocutory mots

- apps from ords
Wed.

Monday...... 9... Sitting in chambers

Tuesday ...10 mots-apps from ords made

Thursday ...19 Witness actions and Q B final appeals if

Wed.

.11 Wed. .........18 on interlocutory mots (sep

required

Friday list) and Chan final apps if

Thursday ...12 Witness list

Saturday ...21
required
Tuesday......24

Friday
Monday...... 23... Sitting in chambers
Wednesday 25 Q B final apps

Saturday ...14
Thursday ...19
Thursday ...26

Tuesday
Friday

Monday......16...Sitting in chambers 20

Wednesday 25 General paper
Bkoy apps and Q B final

Tuesday ...17
Friday
Saturday ...21 Chan final apps

Thurs.
27

.26 apps

Friday Monday ....23

27...Mots, adj sums, and gen pa Thursday ...19 Witness list

Wednesday 18
Tuesday ...24
N.B.--Admiralty Appeals (with Assessors)

Friday .20
App motns ex pte-org! will be taken on days to be appointed | Any cause intended to be heard as a short

cause must be so marked in the cause

Saturday ...21 mots-apps from ords made by the court.

book at least one clear day before the

Monday......23...Sitting in chambers Wednesday 25 on interlocutory mots (sep

Tuesday 24

same can be put in the paper to be so
list), and Chan final apps
if required

heard, and the necessary papers, includ- Wednesday 25 Witness List Thursday .. 26

ing minutes of the proposed judgment or

Thursday...23)
Chan final apps
Friday ......27

HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. order, must be left with the judge's clerk Friday ......27...Mots and non wit list

one clear day before the cause is to be Any cause intended to be heard as a short N.B.-Lunacy Matters (if any) are taken

CHANCERY DIVISION.
put into the paper.

cause must be so marked in the cause in Appeal Court II. on every Monday

book at least one clear day before the at Eleven until further notice. CHANCERY COURT I.

same can be put in the paper to be so MR. JUSTICE NORTH.

CHANCERY COURT IV.

heard. Two copies of minutes of the

proposed judgment or order must be left APPEAL COURT I. Tues., Apr. 19...Mots and adj sums

MR. JUSTICE KEKEWICH.

in court with the judge's clerk one clear Wed. 20

day before the cause is to be put in the Final and interlocutory appeals from the Thursday ...21 Adj sums

paper. Queen's Bench Division, the Probate, Friday

The following will be the Order of Business ......22... Mots and adj sums

according to the days of the week :Divorce, and Admiralty Division (Ad( Sht caus, pets, fur cons, &

N.B.- The following Papers on Further miralty), and the Queen's Bench Division Saturday ...23

adj gums
Monday-Sitting in chambers

Consideration are required for the use of Sitting in Bankruptcy.

Tuesday

the Judge, viz. :-Two Copies of Minutes Monday......25...Sitting in chambers Wednesday General paper

of the proposed Judgment or Order, , App motns ex pte-org1 Tuesday ...26

Thursday

Copy Pleadings, and i Copy Chief Clerk's mots - apps from ords Wed. .27

Friday (except April 29 and May 6)

Certificate, which must be left in Court Tues., Apr. 19 made on interlocutory mots Thursday .28 Acts with wits

Motions and Adjourned Summonses.

with the Judge's Clerk one clear day and new trial paper if re- Friday 29

The first day of the Sittings, Tuesday,

before the Further Consideration is ready quired Saturday ...30

April 19, will also be a Motion day, and to come into the paper.

...10

.26

......13

.

...., 3

......13

.18

......20

.....13

...24

« PreviousContinue »