though for long past firmly established in the Attorney-General personally, has been the subject of conflicting decision as to its extension to the Solicitor-General and ordinary counsel when representing the Crown-though there is little doubt but that at the present day the Solicitor-General has an equal claim to it, yet the tendency of judicial decisions is to narrow it as much as possible. Mr. Kyshe notices that in 1891 it was decided in the Supreme Court of the Straits Settlements that the privilege extends to the Attorney-General of a Crown Colony, though not to the Attorney-General of a County Palatine, the reason doubtless being that the latter does not represent the Crown but the county. Among other periodicals we notice: The Chicago Legal News; The Law Book News, of St. Paul, Minn.; The National Corporation Reporter, of Chicago; The Canadian Law Times; The Western Law Times, of Canada; The Madras Law Journal; The Law Times, London; The Law Journal, London; Bulletin Mensuel de la Société de Législation Comparée; Annuaire de Législation Française; Annuaire de Législation Etrangère, Paris; La Revue Générale; Revue Bibliographique Belge; Case and Comment, Rochester, N.Y.; American Law Review; University Law Review; Canada Law Journal: Journal du Droit International Priva et de la Jurisprudence Comparée, Nos. I.-VI. (Paris, 1897). Quarterly Digest OF ALL REPORTED CASES, IN THE Law Times AND Law Reports FOR END OF MAY AND By THOMAS J. BARNES, of the Middle Temple, INDEX. Where a case has already been given in the Digest for a preceding quarter, the additional report is given after the name of the case, with a reference to the volume of the Digest in which it first appeared, the thick number being the number of the volume. AARON'S REEFS v. TWISS (L.R. [1896] A.C. 273; 74 L.T. 794), 6, iv. Adcock v. Evans; in re Allen (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 345; 75 L.T. 136), 1, i. Alcoy and Gandia Railway and Harbour Company, Limited v. Greenhill (74 L.T. 345), 22, vii. Allcard V. Walker; re Lucas Walker v. Lupton (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 369; 74 L.T. 487), 14, iii. Alty v. Farrell (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 636; 74 L.T. 492), 16, vi. Armstrong v. Weeding; in re Weeding (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 364; 74 L.T. 651), 34, iv. Atkinson v. Carlisle (Mayor of) (L.R. Attorney-General v. Governors of Christ's Hospital (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 879), 4, vi. Attorney-General v. Wolverton, Lord (75 L.T. 71), 31, iii. BAIN V. BAIN; re Smith (75 L.T. 46), 21, iii. Ballantyne & Co. v. Mackinnon (75 L.T. 95), 28, v. Bangor Castle, the (74 L.T. 768), 29, iv. Barr, re; e. p. Wolfe (L.R. [1896] 1 Binns, re; Lee v. Binns (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 584; 75 L.T. 99), 1, ii. Borrow v. Howland (74 L.T. 787), 24, vi. "Bovril," re, Trade Mark (74 L.T. 805), 32, i. Bradford v. Mayor, &c., of Eastbourne (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 205; 74 L.T. 763), 16, v. Brandreth v. Colvin; in re Pitcairn (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 199), 35, ii. Brewer's Settlement, in re; Morton v. Blackmore (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 503; 75 L.T. 177), 28, ii. Broom v. Phillips (74 L.T. 459), 33, v. Bryant (in the goods of) (L.R. [1896] P. 159), 1, iv. Bulkeley v. Stephens (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 241; 74 L.T. 409), 2, v. Buller v. Giberne; re Buller (74 L.T. 407), 34, vi. Burgess v. Morton (L.R. [1896] A.C. 136), 22, vi. Burnett v. Berry (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 641; 74 L.T. 494), 19, iii. CAIN V. MOON (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 283; 74 L.T. 728), 11, ix. Carew v. Carew; re Carew (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 311; 74 L.T. 501), 34, v. Carter and Others v. Rigby & Co. (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 113; 74 L.T. Chaddock v. British South Africa Charriere, re; Duret v. Charriere (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 912; 74 L.T. 650), 11, x. Clarke's Design, re; Clarke v. Sax and Co., Ltd. (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 38; 74 L.T. 631), 10, viii. Clegg, Parkinson & Co. v. Earby Gas Co. (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 592), 13, iii. Clifford v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 187; 74 L.T. 699), 26, v. Clydesdale Bank, Ltd. v. Paton and Another (74 L.T. 738), 13, iv. Commissioners of Police v. Cartman (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 655; 74 L.T. 726), 16, i. Commissioner for Railways V. O'Rourke (75 L.T. 84), 5, vi. Conolly (Sarah Jane, in the goods of) (74 L.T. 461), 1, v. Conquest v. Ebbetts (75 L.T. 36), 15, vii. Cook v. Culverhouse; in re Culverhouse (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 251; 74 L.T. 347), 12, iii. Cook v. Hainsworth (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 85; 75 L.T. 51), 4, iii. Cook's Mortgage, re; Lawledge v. Tyndall (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 923), 14, vi. Cooper v. Pearse (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 562; 74 L.T. 495), 15, v. Copernicus, the (L.R. [1896] P. 154 and 237; 74 L.T. 431 and 757), 29, v. Cotton v. Vogan & Co. (74 L.T. 598), 8, vii. Craig v. Craig and Hamp (L.R. [1896] P. 171), 11, iv. Craig v. Midland Coal and Iron Co. (74 L.T. 744), 6, vii. Creagh v. Creagh (74 L.T. 430), 28, i. Crichton v. Crichton (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 870; 74 L.T. 357), 32, vii. DAVIDSON V. MYRTLE; re Smith (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 590; 74 L.T. 810), 33, i. De Hoghton v. De Hoghton; in re De Hoghton (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 385; 74 L.T. 613), 27, iv. Derby (County Council of) v. Urban District Council of Matlock, Bath, and Scarthin Nick (L.R. [1896] A.C. 315; 74 L.T. 595), 13, v. Derbyshire (County Council of) and Mayor, &c., of Derby, re (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 53; 74 L.T. 747), 22, ii. Derbyshire (County Council of) and Mayor, &c., of Derby, re (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 297), 23, v. D'Errico v. Samuel (75 L.T. 59), 21, iv. Dewhurst and Sons, Ltd., in re Trade Mark of (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 137; 74 L.T. 388), 32, ii. Dibbins v. Dibbins, L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 348; 75 L.T. 137), 8, v. Dickens v. Gill (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 310; 75 L.T. 32), 26, ii. Dixon v. Great Western Railway (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 333), 25, iv. Douglas v. Douglas (74 L.T. 384), 11, viii. Drury v. Army and Navy Auxiliary Stores (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 271; 74 L.T. 621), 18, i. Duret v. Charriere; in re Charriere (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 912; 74 L.T. 650), 11, x. Dyson and Fowke's Contract (74 L.T. 759), 33, vii. EARNSHAW V. EARNSHAW (L.R. [1896] P. 160; 74 L.T. 560), 14, i. Edwards v. Walters (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 157; 74 L.T. 396), 19, v. Ehrmann v. Ehrmann (75 L.T. 37), 21, ii. Elliot, re; Kelly v. Elliot (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 353; 75 L.T. 138), 35, iii. Ellis v. Ellis (L.R. [1896] P. 251), 14, iv. Emerald, the; the Greta Holme (L.R. [1896] P. 192; 74 L.T. 645), 28, iii. Escritt v. Todmorden Co-operative Society (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 461; 74 L.T. 350), 14, v. European Blair Camera Co.'s Trade Mark, re (75 L.T. 63), 31, v. FABER V. MONTAGUE (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 549; 74 L.T. 346), 33, iii. Fooks v. Horner; re Horner (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 188; 74 L.T. 686), 35, i. Foster v. Fyfe and Another (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 104; 74 L.T. 784), 18, v. Frewen v. Law Life Assurance Co. (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 511; 75 L.T. 17), 27, v. GASKELL V. GOSLING (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 669; 74 L.T. 674), 24, i. Germaine v. The London Exhibitions, Limited (75 L.T. 101), 19, vi. Gillespie Bros. & Co. v. Cheney Eggar & Co. (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 59), 8, iv. Graham v. Drummond (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 968; 74 L.T. 417), 1, iii. Grainger & Son v. Gough (L.R. [1896] A.C. 325; 74 L.T. 435), 26, viii. Griffin's Divorce Bill (L.R. [1896] A.C. 133), 11, v. HAIGH V. LONDON AND NORTH WESTERN RAILWAY AND GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY, re, AN ARBITRATION BETWEEN (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 649; 74 L.T. 655), 3, i. Hammersmith (Vestry of) v. Lowenfeld (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 278; 75 L.T. 182), 18, ii. Hannans Empress Gold Mining and Development Co., Ltd.; e. p. Carmichael (74 L.T. 550 and 75 L.T. 45), 8, ii. Hardy v. Farmer; in re Hardy (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 904; 74 LT. 403), 3, vi. Harkness and Allsopp's Contract, re (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 358; 74 L.T. 652), 34, ii. Harling v. Harling (74 L.T. 559), 23, iii. Hart v. Stone (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 754), (55, ii., ante). Hassell v. Stanley (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 607; 74 L.T. 375), 22, ix. Heard v. Heard (L.R. [1896] P. 188), 13, vi. Hellard v. Bewes, in re (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 229; 74 L.T. 457), 22, xi. Hemp, Yarn and Cordage Co., in re; Hindley's Case (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 121; 74 L.T. 627), 7, ii. Hiddle v. National Fire Insurance Co. of New Zealand (L.R. [1896] A.C. 372), 23, vi. Higginshaw Mills and Spinning Co., Ltd., re (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 544; 75 L.T. 5), 6, ii. Hill, deceased (Trustees of the property of Lord) v. Rowlands (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 124; 74 L.T. 556), 3, iii. Hill v. Pilcher (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 962; 74 L.T. 460), 27, ii. Hill's Waterfall Estate and Gold Mining Co., Ltd., re (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 947; 74 L.T. 341), 5, vii. Hindson v. Ashby (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 1; 74 L.T. 327), 26, i. Hodson v. Heuland (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 428; 74 L.T. 811), 15, vi. Hood-Barrs v. Heriot (L.R. [1896] A.C. 174; 74 L.T. 353), 17, vi. Hood-Barrs v. Heriot (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 610; 74 L.T. 372), 22, viii. Hood-Barrs v. Heriot; e. p. Blyth (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 338; 75 L.T. 15), 21, v. Hornsey District Council v. Smith (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 254; 74 L.T. 415), 19, iv. How v. Earl Winterton (75 L.T. 40), 32, viii. Howard v. Rowatt's Wharf, Ltd. (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 93; 74 L.T. 473), 7, vii. Huber (in the goods of) (L.R. [1896] P. 209), 2, i. Hunt v. Worsfold (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 224; 74 L.T. 456), 23, i. Hyderabad (Deccan) Co., Ltd., re (75 L.T. 23), 6, i. ISAACS V. CHINNERY (74 L.T. 320), 17, ii. JACKSON V. RAINFORD COAL COMPANY (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 340), 6, vi. Johnson v. Voight and Co. (75 L.T. 57), 5, iii. Johnstone v. Haviland (L.R. [1896] A.C. 95), 27, i. Jones v. Jones (L.R. [1896] P. 165; 75 L.T. 190), 11, ii. Jones v. Withers (74 L.T. 572), 16, ii. KEMP V. LESTER (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 162), 23, viii. Kemp v. Rozey; re Sharland, No. 2 (74 L.T. 664), 34, vii. Kennedy v. De Trafford (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 762; 74 L.T. 599), 18, vị. Killick V. Graham; Linton V. Burchell (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 196; 75 L.T. 29), 26, iv. Kingston Cotton Mills Co., No. 2, in re; e. p. Pickering and Peasegood (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 279; 74 L.T. 568), 7, iii. Kirby v. North British and Mercan tile Insurance Co. (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 99; 74 L.T. 723), 17, viii. Kirkwood v. Smith (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 582; 74 L.T. 423), 24, v. Kissam v. Link (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 574; 74 L.T. 368), 22, v. Knight v. Simmons (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 294; 74 L.T. 563), 10, i. König and Ebhardt's Application, re (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 236), 32, iv. LA COMPAGNIE DE MAYVILLE V. WHITLEY (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 788; 74 L.T. 441), 7, viii. Land Securities Co., in re; e. p. Farquhar (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 320; 74 L.T. 400), 8, i. Lane v. Lane (74 L.T. 557), 13, vii. Lawledge v. Tyndale, re Cook's Mortgage (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 923; 74 L.T. 652), 14, vi. Lawrence, re (L.R. [1896] P. 244), 12, i. Le Brasseur and Oakley, in re; e. p. Terrell (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 487; 74 L.T. 526 and 717), 30, iv. Lee v. Binns; re Binns (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 584; 75 L.T. 99), 1, ii. Lees' Settlement Trusts, in re (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 508; 75 L.T. 178), 33, iv. Lintern v. Burchell (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 196; 75 L.T. 29), 26, iv. Little v. Stevenson & Co. (L.R. [1896] A.C. 108; 74 L.T. 529), 29, vii. Lloyd and North London Railway (City Branch) Act, 1861 (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 397; 74 L.T. 548), 8, viii. Lloyd's Bank, Ltd. v. Bullock (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 192; 74 L.T. 687), 18, vii. Lock v. Queensland Investment and Land Mortgage Company, Ltd. (75 L.T. 3), 6, iii. London County Council v. Churchwardens, &c., of Lambeth (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 25; 74 L.T. 605), 20, iv. Lyons and Sons v. Wilkins (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 811; 74 L.T. 358), 32, v. MACDUFF V. MACDUFF; in re MACDUFF (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 451; 74 L.T. 706), 4, vii. Malcolm v. Burford Hancock; in re Hancock (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 173; 74 L.T. 658) (80, ii., ante), 20, vi. Manchester and County Bank v. Higginshaw Mills and Spinning Co. Ltd. (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 544; 75 L.T. 5), 6, ii. Mansion House Association on Railway Traffic v. London and NorthWestern Railway (L.R. [1896] 1 Q.B. 273; 74 L.T. 463), 25, ii. Maréchal Suchet, the (L.R. [1896] P. 233; 74 L.T. 789), 29, iii. Mariposa, the (75 L.T. 54), 29, i. Marsh v. Joseph (74 L.T. 412), 30, v. Matheson & Co. v. Ludwig; re Doetsch (75 L.T. 69), 20, i. McKeown v. Boudard Peveril Gear Co., Ltd. (74 L.T. 712) (74, vi., ante), 6, viii. Middlesex (County Council of) v. St. George's Union (Assessment Committee of) (L.R. [1896] 2 Q.B. 143; 75 L.T. 153), 25, vi. Moran v. Place (L.R. [1896] P. 214; 74 L.T. 661) (79, i., ante), 17, v. Morton v. Blackmore; in re Brewer's Settlement (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 503; 75 L.T. 177), 28, ii. Mount Cashel v. More-Smyth (L.R. [1896] A.C. 158; 74 L.T. 321), 12, iv. NEW ORMONDE CYCLE Co., LTD., re (L.R. [1896] 2 Ch. 520; 75 L.T. 50), 31, vi. New South Wales (Attorney-General for) v. Rennie (L.R. [1896] A.C. 376; 74 L.T. 532), 5, ii. |