tions relating to plans, specifications, &c., it cannot be doubted that the jurisdiction to quash the resolution relates to the resolution approving the plans and specifications. In the present case the objection was under sub-section (d) of section 7 and was that the proposed works were insufficient and unreasonable. That related to the works as specified in the plans. That must be the true construction of the clause. It was not intended to interfere with the jurisdiction of the local authority to deal with the works as a whole but merely as regards the sufficiency and reasonableness of the mode of carrying out the works. The expression "insufficient points only to a comparison between the work proposed to be done and the proposed manner of carrying out such work. The expression "unreasonable was much wider. It gave the justices power to consider whether the works as a whole were a reasonable thing to be done (Sheffield Corporation v. Anderson, 64 L. J. M. C. 44). The magistrates, however, in this case had not decided anything of the kind. They appeared to have thought that it would be well to have the street made wider, and that by withholding their approval of the scheme to compel the corporation to widen the street. In deciding that the work was insufficient it was clear that they were thinking of the insufficiency of the scheme as a whole. That was a matter they could not consider. They had found that the work was unreasonable because they thought that the street ought to be widened They had applied the wrong principle to this case. Their order would therefore be quashed and the appeal allowed. KENNEDY, J., delivered judgment to the same effect. Appeal allowed. -COUNSEL, W. Appleton; J. Chester. SOLICITORS, Torr & Co., for John Harrop White, Mansfield; J. & R. Gole, for Pashley & Hodgkinson, Rotherham. [Reported by E. G. STILLWELL, Barrister-at-Law.] This was an appeal by the claimant from the decision of his Honour Judge Paterson on an interpleader issue in which the question was whether the rights of the claimant, claiming for himself and the other debenture-holders of the defendant company (the judgment debtors), to certain goods seized under a writ of fi. fa. by the sheriff prevailed over the rights of the plaintiffs, who were the execution creditors. The learned judge held that they did not on the ground (1) that the rights of the debenture-holders had not become "crystallized," the debentures not having become due and no receiver for the debenture-holders having been appointed; and (2) that seizure of the company's goods under execution was a dealing with such goods in the ordinary course of business and did not contravene any rights of the debenture-holders, whose securities were subject to the risk of such seizure. The company in 1894 issued £3,000 first mortgage debentures in sixty debentures of £50 each, and six of these were held by Richards, the complainant. They were payable on the 31st of December, 1898, or on such earlier date as the principal moneys thereby secured should become payable in accordance with the conditions endorsed thereon. Amongst such conditions were the following: "The principal moneys hereby secured shall become payable immediately on the happening of any of the events hereinafter specified, and also all right of the company to deal for any purpose whatsoever with any of the property shall forthwith cease on the happening of any such events." Among such events were these: "If an order is made or an effective resolution is passed for winding up the company." "Whenever the trustee of the within-mentioned trust deed shall have entered upon the mortgaged premises comprised in the trust deed, or appointed a receiver or receivers under the provisions therein contained." It was also provided that the debentures should be a floating security and that the company should not before payment of such debentures create any charge to the prejudice of the holders without their sanction, and that no part of the property subject to the floating security of such debentures should be dealt with except in the ordinary course of the business of the company. It was further provided that the holders should be entitled to the benefits of and be subject to the conditions of the said trust deed. This trust deed vested in a trustee for the benefit of the debenture-holders the leasehold property and the uncalled capital of the company, and gave to such trustee the right to call upon the company to vest in him all other property of the company, including the goodwill of its business but excluding any chattels witbin the meaning of the Bills of Sale Act, but the company was left free until the trustee or debenture-holders took action on the happening of certain events (one of which was "if any execution, sequestration, extent, or other process of any court or authority is sued out against the property of the company for any sum whatsoever" when the moneys secured by the debentures would become payable) to carry on the business and deal with the assets of the company in the ordinary course of business. The company got into financial difficulties and the plaintiffs obtained judgment against them for £11 178. 91., and a writ of fi. fa. was issued under which the sheriff seized certain goods in the possession of the company which were charged by the debentures. The claimant then, for himself and the other debenture-holders, claimed the goods as theirs under the debenture securities. The sheriff thereupon interpleaded and the goods seized were not sold. The due date of the debentures had not arrived, and no winding-up resolution had been passed or receiver appointed. The question thereupon arose, did the rights of the debenture-holders prevail against those of the execution creditor? THE COURT (Lord RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN, C.J., and MATHEW, J.) took time to consider their judgment. May 14.-Lord RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN, C.J., read the judgment of the court allowing the appeal. In the course of the judgment his lordship said the court could not assent to the view of the county court judge that a seizure under an execution on a judgment against the company was a dealing by the company in the ordinary course of business within the condition endorsed on the debentures so as to be within the authority given to the company by the terms of the debentures. It was not in the ordinary course of business that the debts of a going business firm or company should be liquidated by seizure of their assets under legal process. The transaction could not properly be called a dealing by the company at all. It was a compulsory legal process directed against the company, not a dealing by them. The second ground upon which the | county court judge had proceeded was that the rights of the debentureholders had not crystallized, in other words, that the moneys secured by the debentures had not become payable. Although that was so, the security constituted by the trust deed had become enforceable by reason of the fact that an execution had been sued out against the company. Apart from that the sheriff could only realize the judgment against the goods of the judgment debtor. Here the goods were charged with the payment of the amount of the debentures. The rights of the execution creditor were subject not only to the legal, but also to the equitable rights of the debenture-holders. The sheriff could not merely by seizing affect the rights of third persons to which property was subject when in the hands of the debtor. It followed therefore that there was no interest of the judgment debtor in the property seized available to satisfy the judgment debt, nor was the debenture-holder prevented from asserting his charge upon the property in the circumstances of the case. The court knew of no case in which in such circumstances as the present the rights of the execution creditor had prevailed over those of the debentureholders. This reasoning was fully supported by the authorities: see Re Standard Manufacturing Co. (39 W. R. 369; 1891, 1 Ch. D. 627), in which case the rights of the debenture-holders had not crystallized; see also Re Opera (Limited) (1891, 3 Ch. D. 260). Appeal allowed.-COUNSEL, H. Reed, Q.C., and Cannot; Macaskie and S. Mayer. SOLICITORS, W. B. Glasier; McKenna & Co. [Reported by E. G. STILLWELL, Barrister-at-Law.] The annual general meeting of the members of this society will be held on Friday, the 15th of July next, at 2 p.m. precisely, for the election of a president and vice-president of the society; of twelve members of the Council, in place of ten members who go out of office in rotation, and of Mr. James Curtis Leman and Mr. Nathaniel Tertius Lawrence, deceased; of three auditors; and for other purposes of the society. The following are the names of the members of the Council who go out of office by rotation, and, so far as is known, all of them, with the exception of Sir Thomas Paine and Mr. F. H. Janson will be nominated for re-election: Mr. William Godden, Mr. F. H. Janson, Mr. G. Keen, Sir THE UNITED LAW CLERKS' SOCIETY. The annual dinner of this society was held at the Holborn Restaurant on Monday last. Among others present were Mr. Rentoul, Q.C., M.P., Mr. English Harrison, Q.C., Mr. FitzGerald, Q.C., Sir George Lewis, Mr. J. Skewes-Cox, M.P., Mr. J. Hollams, Mr. Upjohn, Q.C., Mr. Baggallay, Q.C., Mr. C. A. Russell, Q.C., Mr. T. T. Bucknill, Q.C., M.P., Mr. C. F. Button (chairman of the society), and Mr. W. May (secretary). Mr. Justice BIGHAM, who presided, in proposing the chief toast, said that the society had distributed since its establishment in 1832, in relief of sickness, old age, and death, no less than £130,000. The institution was something more than a charity. Its committee of management was composed almost exclusively of the clerks themselves, and, though it was not entirely a charity, it deserved the sympathy of all who took an interest in the great profession to which they belonged. He bore testimony to the high character, capacity, and sense of duty of barristers' and solicitors' clerks. The objects of the society were such as ought to command great sympathy, and he urged that, considering the largeness of the profession, it ought to have a great increase of members and subscribers. He appealed on behalf of the society for generous support from all members of the profession. Mr. CLAUDE BAGGALLAY, Q.C., proposed "The Bench, the Bar, and the Profession," Mr. ENGLISH HARRISON, Q.C., responding. "The Chairman ” was proposed by Mr. PICKFORD, Q.C. ❘ point of view, they ought to be satisfied that the association was in a proper position. He was not altogether satisfied with the amount which had been given away. He would have been glad if further applications had been made or that the association could properly have given away even a larger sum than £1,000. But that sum had had a very beneficial influence upon those who had received it, and the directors had given £5 as a bonus to each annuitant on account of its being the Jubilee year. After referring to the loss by death of Mr. H. Brandon, Mr. T. P. Dixon, Mr. J. Ingram, and Mr. N. T. Lawrence, and of Mr. Spencer Whitehead as a member of the board owing to his appointment to a mastership of the High Court, he said that the step taken last year in reducing the annual subscription with a view to getting the younger members of the profession especially to join the association was the right one, and had proved successful. But he would not be content until there were 200 new members. One hundred new members had joined the association during the year, and he thought that if due efforts were used another hundred might be gained during the present year. There were a great number of solicitors who even now did not know that there was such an institution in existence as the Law Association for the benefit of widows and others connected with the families of solicitors practising in the metropolis, and he hoped the members would do their best to increase the membership. The investments were of the very best possible character, and there had been added to them during the year £519 8s. 3d. consols, making altogether £23,000 consols, the present value of which was £27,472 10s. What was wanted was more members to take an interest in the association and to bring before it all cases calling for its help. Mr. R. J. PEAD (chairman of the board) moved the adoption of the report. He said that although there had been no actual loss at present by the reduction of the annual subscription he was afraid that they would discover that presently there would be a falling off in the amount of the During the evening it was announced that subscriptions had been receipts. Therefore he urged upon those present, especially the new mem promised amounting to £500. LAW ASSOCIATION. The eighty-first annual general meeting of the Law Association was held on Thursday at the Incorporated Law Society's Hall, Mr. CHARLES BURT (vice-president) taking the chair. The report stated that the funded property of the association now consists of £33,807. The total receipts for the year were £1,972 16s. 2d. The directors had distributed £745 amongst sixteen members' cases and £225 amongst seventeen non-members' cases, making the total relief granted £1,000 £519 89. 3d. consols had been purchased and added to the £22,480 118. 9d. previously held, and there remained a cash balance in hand cf £759 48. 2d. towards the expenditure of the current year. With deep regret the directors had to report the deaths during the year of the several members, amongst them Mr. Horatio Brandon, who was at the time of his decease, chairman of the board of directors. The directors had gratefully to acknowledge the receipt of a legacy of £105 from Mr. Brandon's executors and a donation of £79 from Mr. Robert Josiah Pead, the chairman of the board, making, with a previous donation, £100. They had also the satisfaction to report the accession of 100 new members during the year, of whom seventy-five were annual subscribers and twenty-five life members. There was, however, still considerable leeway to be made up before the diminution in income caused by the reduction of the annual subscription from £2 28. to £1 1s., and the directors accordingly ventured once again to urge upon members the importance of using their personal influence to add still further to the number of subscribers, so that the assistance hitherto afforded to their less fortunate professional brethren and their families through the medium of the association might be continued in the future and the benefits of the institution more widely extended. The CHAIRMAN said he met those present with great pleasure upon this occasion. Last year some important and special matters were brought before the meeting, the chief which was then discussed and settled being the reduction of the annual subscriptions of members from £2 23. to £1 18. It was expected that at all events at first the association would lose some portion of its income owing to the reduction of the subscription, but he was glad to state that the change had not turned out badly. The association had obtained 100 new members during the last year, and although the old members, who, if they pleased, might pay only £1'1s. a year, had for the most part continued their former contributions, and to pay their £2 28. annually, as, indeed, he had expected. Thirty of the old members had continued to pay £2 28., whilst eighty had paid £1 18., as they were entitled to do. In respect of the 100 new members, seventy-five were annual and twenty-five life members. The result of the alteration had been that the association had lost eighty guineas by the reduction, and had received one hundred guineas in respect of new members, therefore it was not at present out of pocket on that account. The receipts for the first year had been £1,263 16s. 2d., while the receipts for last year were £442 4s. 2d., and the tota receipts, including dividends, amounted to £1,548 16s. 7d. last year, as against £1,972 16s. 2d. for this year-an increase of £424. Of that sum £189 58. consisted of a legacy and a special donation, Mr. Brandon's legacy of £100 and a donation of £79 from the chairman of the board, making, with the previous contribution he had given, £100. The disbursements for the year had been £100 less than in the former year. In respect of members' cases, the association had distributed £745 against £845 for the previous year, and £255 had been distributed in non-members' cases against £260, making a total of £1,000 as against £1,105 in the previous year. Four annuitants had died during the year, their allowance being altogether £155 a year. The balance in 1897 was £620 against £759 48. 2d. for the present year; therefore, from a financial' bers, to do their utmost to bring in new annual subscribers. He would not be satisfied until the receipts had equalled the former income, and there must be a large increase of annual subscribers to bring this about. He pointed out that the subscription was not a penny a day. Gratifying as it was to have the large reserves, he thought it was not desirable that the should be maintained or added to at the expense of relieving the sick and needy. They would all be glad to see the benefits of the association extended, and that within proper limitations the whole of the income for the year should be distributed. He thought there was a very successful future before the association. Mr. SIDNEY SMITH seconded the motion, which was agreed to. Sir Richard Webster was re-elected president; Mr. Charles Burt, vicepresident; and Mr. R. J. Pead, chairman of the board. The retiring directors were also re-elected with the addition of Mr. E. T. H. Brandon and Mr. S. N. Hargrove to the vacancies, and Mr. R. Hewlett and Mr. H. J. Calley were re-elected auditora. On the motion that the sum of £300, instead of £250 as last year, should be placed at the disposal of the directors for the relief of the cases of non-members, Mr. A. Toovey observed that some years ago the question has arisen as to how far the association was a purely charitable institution, or how far it was a mutual benefit society. There was a difference of opinion in the association in this respect. The society was composed of solicitors prac tising in the metropolis, and the fact that only 196 were annual subscribers out of the many thousands was one which he could not lose sight of, and which every right-minded man ought to protest against. He thought that the men who subscribed to the association were entitled to a great deal more consideration than were those who either from want of thrift or want of thought had not made such a sacrifice. There had been an awakening on the board of late years as to the desirability of making some increase in the amounts given to members, and he thought they were entitled to more sympathy than were non-members. For the first few years of the association no grants were made to non-members, subsequently £100 was voted, and the amount had varied considerably; it had been as high as £350 and as low as £45. During the last five years the average had been £211. The immediate result of the reduction of the annual subscription was a deficiency of £54 12s., whilst there was an increase of seventy-five new members. These constituted a source of liability or responsibility to the association, and he did not think that £1 1s. was anything more than a fair payment to cover the liability. If misfortune should overtake any of the old members they would feel that, having paid £2 28. subscription, they would be entitled to greater consideration and to a larger grant than would the newer members. He considered the time inopportune for increasing the amount to be disbursed amongst non members. The CHAIRMAN said he did not take the somewhat pessimistic view adopted by Mr. Toovey. There were 310 members, and if the funds were now divided each member would have £150. Therefore he did not think they should haggle over £50. The motion was adopted. Mr. Toovey asked whether any step had been taken to obtain a recogni tion of the association in the administration of the Victoria Pension Fund raised by the Incorporated Law Society, and if so what was the result? The CHAIRMAN replied that no action had been taken by the board in the matter. He pointed out that the fund had been collected for the benefit of solicitors in England and Wales, and that as the sphere of operations of the Solicitors' Benevolent Association extended over the provinces, while the Law Association was confined to London, he thought there was no reason for the board to seek to have a voice in the adminis tration of the fund. A vote of thanks to the chairman, moved by Mr. LOVELL and seconded by Mr. CALLEY, terminated the proceedings. LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL. THE INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY. At the examination for honours of candidates for admission on the roll of solicitors of the Supreme Court, the examination committee recommended the following as being entitled to honorary distinction : FIRST CLASS. [In Order of Merit.] ALEXANDER THOMAS MILLER, who served his clerkship with Messrs. Miller & Williamson, of Liverpool. REGINALD HERBERT PENLEY, B.A. (Camb.), who served his clerkship with Mr. James Gordon Wenden, of the firm of Messrs. Vizard, Wenden, & Son, of Dursley; and with Messrs. Crowders & Vizard, of London. HARRY LEOPOLD FIRTH BERRY, who served his clerkship with Mr. William Warburton, of Manchester. SECOND CLASS. [In Alphabetical Order.] Theophilus Hamilton Bevan, who served his clerkship with Mr. Charles William Slater, of Swansea; and with Mr. John Thomas Lewis, of London. Frank Dawes, who served his clerkship with Mr. Thomas Richard Bonser, of Oldbury. Alfred Herbert Hall, who served his clerkship with Mr. Thomas Dunn Marshall, of South Shields. Gibson Warwick Finlay Hamilton, who served his clerkship with Mr. John Messer Bennetts, of Truro. Daniel Johnston Mason, who served his clerkship with Mr. Peter de Egglesfield Collin, of the firm of Messrs. Collin & Turney, of Mary port; and with Mr. George Augustus Lightfoot, of the firm of Messrs. Donald, Ostell, & Lightfoot, of Carlisle; and of Messrs. Lightfoot & Lightfoot, of Maryport. Edward Alexander Pope, who served his clerkship with Mr. Henry Argent Simmons, of Bath; and Mr. Frederick Woolbert, of London. Edmund Spencer, who served his clerkship with Messrs. Miller & Williamson, of Liverpool. THIRD CLASS. [In Alphabetical Order.] Alfred John Adams, who served his clerkship with Mr. Henry Cecil Geare, of London. Harold Barker, who served clerkship with Mr. James Moxon, of Pontefract. Rowland Henry Berkeley, who served his clerkship with Mr. Albert Saunders and Mr. Graham Stokes, of London. Frederick William Green, who served his clerkship with Mr. William Cooke Kettle, of Wolverhampton. Eugene Guye, LL.B. (Lond.), who served his clerkship with Mr. Charles Hulbert, of the firm of Messrs. Eardley-Holt, Hulbert, & Hubbard, of London. Oswald Hesketh Hanson, B.A. (Camb.), who served his clerkship with Mr. George Kyme Wright, of London. Alfred Allan Ironside, who served his clerkship with Mr. Leslie Antili, of the firm of Messrs. Leslie Antill & Arnold, of London. Walter Daniel Stansfield, who served his clerkship with Mr. J. D. Higson and Mr. John James Rawsthorn, of the firm of Messrs. Rawsthorn, Ambler, & Booth, of Preston. Alfred Miles Taylor, who served his clerkship with Messrs. F. & H. Taylor, of Bakewell. The Right Hon. SPENCER HORATIO WALPOLE died at Ealing on Sunday last at the age of nearly ninety-two. He was a great-grandson of Sir Robert Walpole, and his mother was a daughter of the second Earl of Egmont. He was educated at Eton and Trinity College, Cambridge, and was called to the bar in 1831. He practised in the Court of Chancery with considerable success, and was made a Queen's Counsel in 1846. In the same year he was returned to Parliament as member for Midhurst; and in University, and held this seat until 1882. He was three times Home 1856, on the death of Mr. Goulburn, he was returned for Cambridge Secretary. APPOINTMENTS. Mr. ARMOND DRIMMIE MALCOLM, Q.C., Chief Justice of the Bahama Islands, has received the honour of Knighthood. has been appointed a K.C.B. The Hon. HAMILTON CUFFE, C.B., barrister, Soliciter to the Treasury, Mr. KENELM DIGBY, barrister, Under-Secretary of State, Home Office, has been appointed a K.C.B. Mr. KENNETH MUIR MACKENZIE, C.B., Q.C., Clerk of the Crown, I as been appointed a K.C.B. Mr. EDWARD LEIGH PEMBERTON, C.B., barris' er, has been appointed a K.C.B. Mr. JOHN MACDONELL, Esq., LI.D., a Master of the Supreme Court of Judicature, has been appointed a C.B. Mr. CLAUD FRASER, solicitor, of the firm of Messrs. Clapham, Fitch, & Co., of 15, Devonshire-square, Bishopsgate, London, bas been appointed a Commissioner for Oaths. Mr. Fraser was admitted in December, 1884. INFORMATION WANTED. JANE WEBSTER, deceased.-Should any person have in their possession a will of the late Mrs. Jane Webster, who died at Norwood-road, S.E., on the 28th of April, 1898, and they will communicate with us, a reward will be paid for their trouble.-Hubbard, Son, & Eve, 110, Cannon-street, E.C., solicitors. GENERAL. Mr. Justice Stirling completed twelve years' service on the bench on the 20th inst., having been appointed a judge of the Chancery Division on the 20th of May, 1886, in succession to Mr. Justice Pearson. The late Mr. Spencer Horatio Walpole, Q.C., was senior Queen's Counsel. He received his patent on the 2nd of July, 1846. The senior Queen's Counsel is now Lord Grimthorpe, who received that rank in 1854. The sittings of the Railway and Canal Commissioners for the hearing of cases in June and July will commence on the following dates: Tuesday, June 7 (Dublin); Tuesday, July 5 (Edinburgh); Thursday, July 21 (London). At the ball given by the treasurer and benchers of the Middle Temple in their hall over 400 of the members and their friends were present. The fine old hall and approaches were tastefully decorated with flowers, and the entire resources of the building were made available for the comfort of the visitors. The band of the Coldstream Guards was in attendance and played in the Minstrels' Gallery. A detective officer with an interesting record, says the Globe, retires from Scotland Yard in the person of Chief Inspector Marshall. He joined the Metropolitan Police Force in 1869, and rose rapidly in the service. Among the notorious cases in which he was engaged may be mentioned that of Mrs. Gordon Baillie and the Dyson-Bartlett case, and to him belongs the credit of having unravelled the Pimlico mystery. When he was in charge of a re-organised detective department at Bow-street, he did good swindlers, the leading spirits in the matrimonial frauds, and the gang of fashionably-dressed rogues who did business in the Strand and in Nor The Council of the Incorporated Law Society accordingly give Class To Mr. Berry-The Prize of the Honourable Society of New Inn-value 5 guineas. To Mr. John Henry Latham Brewer, who served his articles with Mr. John Brewer, of Barnstaple, and Messrs. Vandercom & Co, of London"The John Mackrell Prize"-value about £12. The Council give Class Certificates to the candidates in the second and third classes. Sixty-four candidates gave notice for the examination. LEGAL NEWS. OBITUARY. Mr. FREDERICK MEADOWS WHITE, Q.C., died on Saturday last. He was educated at Oxford, and became a fellow of Magdalen College. He was called to the bar in 1853, and acquired an extensive practice. He took silk in 1877. For many years he was Recorder of Canterbury. In 1893 he was appointed judge of county courts for the Clerkenwell circuit, but was compelled by ill-health to resign the post. thumberland-avenue. The following gentlemen have been elected members of the General Council of the Bar as the result of the election which concluded on Saturday: Mr. Montague Crackanthorpe, Q.C., Mr. Warmington, Q.C., Mr. F. O. Crump, Q.C., Mr. Tindal Atkinson, Q.C., Mr. Joseph Walton, Q.C., Mr. Swinfen Eady, Q.C., Mr. Vernon R. Smith, Q C., Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald, Q C., Mr. Bargrave Deane, Q.C., Mr. J. Alderson Foote, Q.C., Mr. T. Tindal Methold, Mr. O. Leigh Clare, M.P., Mr. R. H. Spearman, Mr. A. C. Maberly, Mr. C. F. Gill, Mr. E. W. Garrett, Mr. Yarborough Anderson, Mr. J. Scott Fox, Mr. Montague Lush, the Hon. Alfred Lyttelton, M.P., Mr. J. E. H. Benn, Mr. H. Erle Richards, Mr. T. Dalton Lawrance, and the Hon. Frank Russell. The Lord Chief Justice presided on Monday at the annual meeting of the Metropolitan Discharged Prisoners' Aid Society, and in the course of his address, said that the society chiefly confined its help to first offenders and to the young. The prison dealt with was that of Pentonville, into which one-thirteenth of the convicted prisoners of the country came. Last year the society dealt with 1,429 persons, of whom only 405 turned out unsatisfactorily. The Government might, according to the statutes, have given the society £2 per head, or over £2,000, but the miserable sum actually received in this way was only £238. Surely, to put the matter on the lowest ground, it would be economical for the country to He pay all that the law allowed, in view of the loss to the State caused by the continued existence of every habitual criminal. He believed that the taxpayers' money could not be invested in a better way, for half-a-dozen prisoners left unreclaimed would more than swallow the £238; and on other grounds a single reclamation would be worth the money spent. could not but think that the Government would listen to any fair representations on this point. The Solicitor-General remarked that this and kindred organizations were really working to prevent the manufacture of habitual criminals. On Monday, in the House of Commons, Mr. Gibson Bowles asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, as was stated by Mr. A. W. Soward, of the Legacy and Succession Duty Department, at p. 8 of his "Handbook to the Estate Duty," the Inland Revenue authorities had followed the opinion of the law officers of the Crown in claiming and exacting estate duty upon the death of a tenant for life of settled property who had bona fide released his interest more than twelve months prior to death, save where the life interest was bonâ fide released before the Finance Act, 1894, came into operation; whether the effect of the saving clause thus introduced into the practice had been that the duty had been claimed and exacted when the deceased died after the Act came into operation, and the life interest had also been released after the Act, while the duty had not been claimed or exacted when the deceased died after the Act, but the life interest had been released before the Act; whether he would state on what date and on what grounds the Board of Inland Revenue came to the decision to adopt in part and to reject in part the advice of the law officers of the Crown; and whether it was in accordance with the usual practice for revenue departments, acting by the direction and under the control of the Treasury, only to act upon the advice of the law officers with such variations as they deemed expedient. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said: The hon. member correctly describes the practice of the Board of Inland Revenue and its effects in the instance which he takes. The practice in question has been in force since July, 1895. The Board of Inland Revenue have not rejected the advice of the law officers of the Crown, but it is their duty to apply that advice, to the best of their judgment, to the different cases that may arise, and it was on account of the extreme difficulty of doing this in this particular matter that we have throughout desired to obtain an interpretation of the law by the proper tribunals. | JOHN DAY & CO, LIMITED-Petn for winding up, presented May 20, directed to be heard BRITISH WORKMAN'S FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Moulton, Northampton. May 18 COURT PAPERS. CIRCUITS OF THE JUDGES. The following Judges will remain in Town:-KENNEDY, J., and BIGHAM, J., during the whole of the Circuits; the other Judges till their respective Commission_Days. NOTICE.-In cases where no note is appended to the names of the Circuit Towns both Civil and Criminal Business must be ready to be taken on the first working day; in other cases the note appended to the name of the Circuit Town indicates the day before which Civil Business will not be taken. In the case of Circuit Towns to which two Judges go there will be no alteration in the old practice. WINDING UP NOTICES. London Gazette.-FRIDAY, May 20. JOINT STOCK COMPANIES. LIMITED IN CHANCERY. BRAZILIAN SYNDICATE, LIMITED-Petn for winding up, presented May 17, directed to be heard on Wednesday, June 8. Marshall & Marshall, 3 and 4, Lincoln's inn fields, solors for petners. Notice of appearing must reach the above-named not later than 6 o'clock in the afternoon of June 7 GOLDEN CROWN, LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)-Creditors are required, on or before July 2, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to Charles Lloyd, 77, Bishopsgate st Within. Burn & Berridge, 11, Old Broad st, colors to liquidator HANNAN'S GOLDEN TREASURE, LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)-Creditors are required, on or before July 2, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to Charles Lloyd, 77, Bishopsgate st Within. Burn & Berridge, 11, Old Broad st, solors to liquidator MAINLAND CONSOLS, LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)-Creditors are required, on or before July 2, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to Charles Lloyd, 77, Bishopsgate st Within. Burn & Berridge, 11, Old Broad st, solors to the liquidator NAVA GOLD MINES SYNDICATE, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before July 4, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to Julius Wilson Hetherington Byrne, 81, Gracechurch st PADDINGTON CONSOLS, LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)-Creditors are required, on or before July 2, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to Charles Lloyd, 77, Bishopsgate st Within. Burn & Berridge, 11, Old Broad st, solors to the liquidator PERKINS, GRAHAM, & Co, LIMITED - Creditors & re required, on or before June 14, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to James Perkins, Exchange chmbre, 12, Bank st, Manchester. Hinde, Milne, & Bury, Manchester, solors for the liquidator SEACOMBE AND BIRKENHEAD INVESTMENT CO, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before July 16, to send their names and addresses, and particulars of their debts or claims, to James Bruce Tytler and John Hinkes Tilman, addressed to the offices of Jones & Milne, 30, North John st, Liverpool, solors for liquidators SEWAGE TRANSMUTATION CO, LIMITED (TRADING AS THE CYPRUS CHEMICAL CO, LIMITED) (IN VOLUNTARY LIQUIDATION)-Creditors are required, on or before June 30, to send their names and addresses, and particulars of their debts and claims, to W G Devon Astle, 61, Old Broad st Travers & Co, Throgmorton avenue, solors WEALTH OF NATIONS EXTENDED, LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)-Creditors are required, on or before July 2, to send their names and addresses, and particulars of their debts or claims, to Charles Lloyd, 77, Bishopsgate st Within Burn & Berridge, 11, Old Broad st, solors to liquidator London Gazette.-TUESDAY, May 24. JOINT STOCK COMPANIES. LIMITED IN CHANCERY. ACCLES, LIMITED-Petn for winding up, presented May 19, directed to be heard on June 8 Farlow & Fuller, 1, Church ct, Clement's lane, solors for petners Notice of appearing must reach the above-named not later than 6 o'clock in the afternoon of June 7 "CLARISSA RADCLIFFE" STEAMSHIP CO, LIMITED-Creditors are required, on or before July 1, to send their names and addresses, and particulars of their debts or claims, to Mr Henry Radcliffe, 4, Dock chbrs, Cardiff John Moxon, Cardiff, solor to liquidator DOVESTON, DAVEY, HULL, & Co, LIMITED-Petn for winding up, presented May 18, directed to be heard June 8. Pritchard & Co, Painters' Hall, Little Trinity ln, agents for Rowcliffe & Co, Manchester, solors for the petners. Notice of appearing must reach the above-named not later than 6 o'clock in the afternoon of June 7 Goy & Co (WITHERS & CHANDLER), LIMITED-Creditors are requested, on or before July 9, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to William Charles Doggett, 17, Holborn viaduct. Negus, Bloomsbury sq, solor to the liquidator HOTEL METROPOLE, BLACKPOOL, LIMITED-Petn for winding up, presented May 19, directed to be heard at the Assize Courts, Strangeways, Manchester, on Tuesday, June 7, at 10.30. John R Gaulter, Albert sq, Fleetwood, solor for the petners. Notice of appearing must reach the above-named not later than 6 o'clock in the afternoon of June 6 Oxford. Wright, J. Channell, J. Mathew, J. Aylesbury Bedford ........Northampton Dates not yet fixed. Leicester Guildford Reading Oxford Worcester ........ Fri., June 3 Maidstone Cambridge B. S. Edmunds Thursday 23). Norwich 19 Tuesday Friday, Monday Tuesday Thursday Friday Monday Wednesday,, Friday * The Asterisk indicates that the Dates in that Column are liable to alteration, THE PROPERTY MART. June 2.-Messra. H. E. FOSTER & CRANFIELD, at the Mart, at 2: To One-sixth of £6,755 Consols; lady aged 68. Solicitors, Messrs. Eastwood, To a Trust Fund of nearly £4,000 Midland Railway Stock; lady aged 50. Solicitor, To One-Fourth share of Freehold and Leasehold Properties producing £708 per POLICIES: For £5,000, £3,000, £1,000, £574, £431. Solicitors, W. Haddon Owen, Esq., Louth; Messrs. Parker, Garrett, & Holman, of London; and Messrs. Meade-King & Son, of Bristol. (See advertisements, this week, back page.) June 3.-Messrs. PERKINS & Sons, at Southampton, the Freehold Property known as the Moorlands Estate, formerly the seat of Sir Richard and Lady Glass, comprising moderate-sized mansion, with lodge and miniature park, with the home farm adjoining, a total area of about 124 acres. Solicitors, Mesers. Bridges, Sawtell, & Co., London. (See advertisement, May 14, p. 5.) COOBAN, WILLIAM, Bootle, nr Liverpool, Pawnbroker June 13 Pride, Liverpool EATHORNE, ELIZABETH WATTS, Penzance, Cornwall June 9 Borlase & Co, Penzance Gardner & Hovenden, Finsbury GREY, the Right Honourable SEYMOUR JOHN, Fourth Earl of Wilton June 8 Grover & Co, King's Bench walk GRINDEY, JOHN, Biggin, Derby, Farmer June 27 Holland & Rigby, Ashborne HENRY, ISAAC SOLOMON, Maida Vale May 31 Wild & Wild, Lawrence In HOUGH, WILLIAM REASON, Cornwall rd, Lambeth June 17 Pearce & Sons, Giltspur st MALLET, ANN, Nottingham June 24 Thorpe & Perry, Nottingham MULLANE, JEREMIAH, Dibrugarh, Assam, India June 4 Maddisons, King's Arms yard June 24 Tylee & Co, Arnold STATHERS, WILLIAM, Kingston upon Hull June 17 Hart, Hull London Gazette-TUESDAY, May 10. ADAMS, SABAH, Cradley, Worcester June 6 Bernard & Co, Stourbridge June 30 Palmer & Co, Tra BOOTHROYD, JAMES, Sheffield June 24 Alderson & Co, Sheffield BROOKE, HARRIET, Alderley Edge, Chester June 11 JE Smith & Pennington, Hyde COOPER, JOHN, Oldbury, Worcester, Grocer June 17 Wright & Hollins, Oldbury Cox, PHILIP HENRY, Liscard. Chester June 8 Tweddle, Liverpool CRANE, JANE, High Barnet, Herts June 18 Peacock, South sq, Gray's inn GANNON, MARY COPESTICK, Grappenhall, Chester May 21 Granger, Warrington HARRISON, MATTHEW, Churchtown, Lancs June 3 Blackhurst, Garstang SCOTT, ABRAHAM, Salford, Gardener May 28 Dixon & Linnell, Manchester WARANS, PETER JOSEPH, New Cross June 9 Keene & Co, Seething lane WESLEY, SAMUEL, Raunds, Northampton, Wesleyan Minister June 11 Hunnybun & FENNER, JOHN, Tamworth, Ale Merchant Pet April 29 Ord May 16 Birmingham FILMER, GEORGE BUDDS, Blackpool, Mineral Water Manu- KITTS, THOMAS, Alfreton, Derbys Derby Pet May 17 MOORING, THOMAS, Markyate, Beds, Corn Dealer Luton |