that for the purposes of the will G. was to be regarded as legitimate, and was entitled to succeed to her mother's share. In re Walker ; Walker v. Lutyens, 77 L.T. 94; L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 238. (i.) C. D.-Gift to Nephews and Nieces-Illegitimate Nephew.-A testator gave a legacy to his wife's nephew R., and left a moiety of the residue of his property to his wife's nephews and nieces equally. R. was illegitimate. Held, that he was entitled to share in the moiety.-In re Parker; Parker v. Osborne, L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 208. (ii.) C. D.-Interest on Advanced Share.-When a child of a testator receives an advancement subsequent to the date fixed for distribution, interest from that date must be charged on the advance.—In re Rees; Rees v. George (17 Ch. Div. 701; 44 L.T. 241), and in re Dallmeyer (L.R. [1896] 1 Ch. 372; 73 L.T. 67) considered.-In re Lambert; Moore v. Middleton, L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 169; 76 L.T. 752. (iii.) P. D.-Revocation-Revival-Wills Act, 1837, s. 22.-A testatrix made a will revoking a former will and subsequently executed a codicil which purported to be a codicil to the will revoked. Held, that the codicil revived the earlier will, and that both wills with the codicil must be admitted to probate.-In the goods of Chilcott, L.R. [1897] P. 223. (iv.) C. D.-Specific Property to Sell and Set Apart.-A specific property was left in trust for sale and investment, but with power to trustees to retain any investment and to set apart portions to answer settled legacies. The residue was given to testator's children equally. The trustees apportioned one of the investments, which was valuable, to answer one of the legacies and to answer as far as it could one share of the residue. Held, that the investment could be appropriated to the specific legacy (following Fraser v. Murdock, 6 App. Cases 855; 45 L.T. 417), and to the residue even in advance (following in re Richardson, 39 Ch. Div. 50; 74 L.T. 12).-In re Brooks; Coles v. Davis, 76 L.T. 771. INDEX. A. & B. (INFANTS) in re (L.R. [1897] BADISCHE ANILIN UND SODA FABRIK V. Balme, in the goods of (L.R. [1897] Bank of New South Wales v. Piper Bartlett & Berry's Contract, in re (76 L.T. 751), 14, iii. Bateman v. Faber (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 223; 77 L.T. 71), 10, iv. Batt's Settled Estates, in re (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 65), 13, ix. Birmingham Vinegar Brewery Co. v. Powell (76 L.T. 792), 19, 27, i., and 106, iv.; 20, 58. iii.; 22, 32, iii.; 21, v. Boyd, in re; Kelly v. Boyd (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 232; 77 L.T. 76), 15, ii. Branckelow SS. Co. v. Lamport and Bristol, Marquis of, in re; Grey v. Grey (L.R. [1897] 1 Ch. 946; 76 L.T. 757), 18, ii. British Natural Premium Provident Association, Limited v. Bywater (77 L.T. 22), 11, vi. Brooks, in re; Coles v. Davis (76 L.T. 771), 24, iv. Broster, in re; e. p. Pruddah (76 L.T. 692), 5, iv. Burgess v. Morris (77 L.T. 97), 10, vi. CAREW V. CROWN PROSECUTOR OF JAPAN (77 L.T. 1), 5, vi. Chambers & Co. v. Gunstone (76 L.T. 780), 3, i. Chilcott, in the goods of (L.R. [1897] P. 223), 24, iii. Christmas v. Jones; in re Jones (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 190), 1, i. Churston (Lord) v. Buller (77 L.T. 45), 18, iii. Clymene, the (76 L.T. 811), 19, viii. Coburn v. Colleage (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 702; 76 L.T. 608), 19, iv. Coleman v. Bucks, and Oxon. Union Bank, Ltd. (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 343; 76 L.T. 684), 22, ii. Coles v. Davis; in re Brooks (76 L.T. 771), 24, iv. Colmer, Limited, in re (L.R. [1897] 1 Ch. 524), 5, i. Cornwall Minerals Railway Co., in re (L.R. (1897] 2 Ch. 74; 76 L.T. 832), 4, iv. Cory & Co. v. The ss. Mecca (owners of) (L.R. [1897] A.C. 286; 76 L.T. 579), 1, iv. Croshaw v. Lyndhurst Ship_Co. (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 154; 76 L.T. 553), 4, ii. Cowley's Estate, in re (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 47), 22, 107, ii. DALTON V. FITZGERALD (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 86; 76 L.T. 700), 22, 78, iii. ; 18, i. Davis, in re; Harrison v. Davis (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 204), 8, v. Delmar's Charitable Trusts, in re (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 163; 76 L.T. 594), 23, ii. V. Derbyshire v. Houleston (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 772; 76 L.T. 624), 1, iii. Deprose Claimant ; Forster Clowser (76 L.T. 825), 13, v. Dick v. Fraser; in re Macdonald (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 181; 76 L.T. 713), 18, v. Duke & Son v. Wisden & Co. (77 L.T. 67), 12, iii. Dunbeth, the (L.R. [1897] P. 133; 76 L.T. 658), 19, vii. Durrant v. Branksome Urban District Council (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 291; 76 L.T. 739), 22, 106, i.; 10, ii. EASTMAN PHOTOGRAPHIC MATERIALS Co.'s TRADE MARK APPLICATION, in re (76 L.T. 730), 21, vi. Eaton & Co., in re; e. p. Viney (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 16), 2, v. Edenbridge (Owners of) v. Green, the Rutland (L.R. [1897] A.C. 333; 76 L.T. 662), 22, 28, vi. ; 20, ii. Edwards v. Steel Young & Co. (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 712; 76 L.T. 689), 20, iv. Edwards's Settlement, in re (76 L.T. 774), 18, iv. Errington, Turbutt v. Errington; in re Errington (76 L.T. 616), 17, viii. Exchange Telegraph Co., Ltd., v. Central News, Ltd., and Another (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 48; 76 L.T. 591), 5, ii. FITZGERALD V. FIRBANK (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 96; 76 L.T. 584), 7, ii. Forster v. Clowser; Diprose Claimant (76 L.T. 825), 13, v. Fortescue v. Mercantile Bank of London (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 236; 76 L.T. 645), 19, iii. Frankenstein v. Gavin's Cycle Cleaning and Insurance Co. (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 62; 76 L.T. 747), 12, ix. Friend, in re; Friend v. Young (77 L.T. 50), 11, iii. Fulham Vestry v. London County Council (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 76; 76 L.T. 691), 10, vii. Fuller and Leathley's Contract and Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1884, in re; and Williams and Duchess of Newcastle's Contract, in re (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 144; 76 L.T. 646), 22, vii. Furness and Others v. Forward Bros. and Co. (77 L.T. 95), 19; vi. GINGER, in re; e. p. LONDON AND UNIVERSAL BANK, LIMITED (76 L.T. 808), 2, vi. Graham v. Sutton, Carden and Co. (77 L.T. 35), 11. v. Grand Junction Waterworks Co. v. Davies (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 209; 76 L.T. 833), 16, i. Great Bardfield, Vicar of v. All Having Interest (L.R. [1897] P. 185), 6, iv. Grey v. Grey; in re Marquis of Bristol (L.R. [1897] 1 Ch. 946; 76 L.T. 757), 18, ii. Greenwell v. Low Beechburn Coal Co., Ltd. (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 165; 76 L.T. 759), 11, i. Goodwin v. Goodwin and Arnold (L.R. [1897] P. 87), 14, v. HADDERLEY V. HANNAM; in re Hannam (L.R. [1897]2 Ch. 39; 76 L.T. 681), 23, iii. V. Hall & Co. v. Trigg (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 219; 76 L.T. 807), 12, ii. Handsworth District Council Derrington (77 L.T. 73), 9, iv. Hannam, in re; Hadderley v. Hannam (LR. [1897] 2 Ch. 39; 76 L.T. 681), 23, iii. Harris v. Sleep, No. 2 (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 80; 76 L.T. 670), 22, 105, vi.; 17, i. Harrison v. Davis; in re Davis (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 204), 8, v. Heston and Isleworth District Council V. Grout (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 306; 76 L.T. 613), 9, v. Heywood v. Whitehead (76 L.T. 781), 1, ii. Hill v. Rowlands (77 L.T. 34), 11, ii. Holt v. Holt; in re Holt; in re Rollason (76 L.T. 776), 13, vii. Hood v. Attorney-General; in re Hunter (L.R. [1897] Ch. 105; 76 L.T. 726), 22, 112, iii.; 23, iv. Hope v. Brash (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 188; 76 L.T. 823), 13, iv. Howarth v. Armstrong (77 L.T. 62), 6, ii. Howell v. Holdroyd (L.R. [1897] P. 198), 6, v. Huddersfield Corporation v. Ravensthorpe Urban District Council (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 121; 76 L.T. 817), 22, 100, iii.; 10, i. Hunt v. Hunt (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 304; 76 L.T. 779), 8, i. Hunter, in re; Hood v. AttorneyGeneral (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 105; 76 L.T. 725), 22, P. 112, iii.; 23, iv. IMRAY V. OAKSHETTE (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 218; 76 L.T. 632), 9, ii. Ingram v. Papillon; in re Ashton (77 L.T. 49), 15, i. JAMES V. DUKINSON; in re MATSON (77 L.T. 69), 6, i. James v. Evans & Co. (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 180; 77 L.T. 78), 7, i. Jenks v. Ditton (76 L.T. 591), 13, vi. Jones, in re; Christmas v. Jones (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 190), 1, i. KARASKHOMA EXPLORING AND PROSPECTING SYNDICATE, LIMITED, in re; PYKE AND GIBSON'S CASE (77 L.T. 82), 4, vi. Kelly v. Boyd; in re Boyd (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 232; 77 L.T. 76), 15, ii. Kerr v. Kerr (77 L.T. 29), 8, ii. Kwang Tung (Owners of ss.) v. Owners of ss. Ngapoota (L.R. [1897] A.C. 391), 20, iii. LACON & Co.; e. p. REGINA V. THORNTON & OTHERS (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 308; 77 L.T. 28), 9, iii. Lambeth Churchwardens v. London County Council (76 L.T. 795), 16, ii. Lambert, in re; Moore v. Middleton (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 169; 76 L.T. 752), 24, ii. Lazarus v. Artistic Photographic Co. (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 214), 22, 97, ii. Leeds Permanent Benefit Building Society v. Malladaine (76 L.T. 650), 3, iii. Llewellyn v. Vale of Glamorgan Railway Co. (L.R. [1897) 2 Q.B. 239; 76 L.T. 778), 16, v. London & Eastern Counties Loan and Discount Co., Ltd. v. Creasey (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 768; 76 L.T. 612), 22, 57, ii; 3, ii. London Metallurgical Co., Limited, in re (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 262; 76 L.T. 829), 4, v. London & Universal Bank, Limited, e.p.; in re Ginger (76 L.T. 808), 2, vi. Longton v. Wilsby (76 L.T. 770), 22, i. Lord Advocate V. Fleming or Robertson (L.R. [1897] A.C. 145), 17, vii. MACAULAY V. POLLEY (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 122; 76 L.T. 643), 19, ii. Macdonald, in re; Dick v. Fraser (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 181; 76 L.T. 713), 18, v. Machado v. Fontes (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 231; 76 L.T. 588), 12, iv. Magnolia Metal Co.'s Trade Marks, in re (76 L.T. 672), 22, 110, iv. ; 21, vii. Manchester and Northern Counties Federation of Coal Traders' Association v. Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Co. (76 L.T. 786), 16, iv. Margetson and Jones, in re (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 314; 76 L.T. 805), 13, viii. "Mary" Tug Co. v. British India Steam Navigation Co. (the "Meanatchy") (L.R. [1897] A.C. 351), 20, i. Matson, in re; James v. Dukinson Mersey Dock and Harbour Board v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 786; 76 L.T. 596), 17, vi. Mexborough (Lord) v. Whitwood Urban District Council (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 111; 76 L.T. 765), 13, i. Mitchell v. Torrington Union (76 L.T. 724), 7, vi. Moore v. Middleton; in re Lambert (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 169; 76 L.T. 752), 24, ii. Morris v. Edmonds (77 L.T. 56), 22, iv. Moss v. Moss (L.R. [1897] P. 263), 8, iv. NEW, PRANCE, AND GARRARD'S TRUSTEES V. HUNTING (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 19; 76 L.T. 742), 22, 90, v.; 2, iv. Oporto, the (L.R. [1897] P. 249), 22, 79, iv. PARKER V. OSBORNE; in re PARKER (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 208), 24, i. Pennington v. Crossley and Son (77 L.T. 4), 3, vi. Plant v. Bourne (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 281; 76 L.T. 820), 22, 111, iii.; 22, vi. Powell v. Kempton Park Race Course Co. (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B 342; 77 L.T. 2), 7, iv. Pruddah e. p.; in re Broster (76 L.'T. 692), 5, iv. Pyke and Gibson's case; in re The Karaskhoma Exploring and Prospecting Syndicate, Limited (77 L.T. 82), 4, vi. RAFFETY V. SCHOFIELD (L.R. [1897] 1 Ch. 937; 76 L.T. 648), 23, i. Reg. v. Davies (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 199; 76 L.T. 786), 7, iii. Reg. v. General Council of Medical Education (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 764 and 2 Q.B. 203; 76 L.T. 706), 5, viii. Reg. v. The Company of Watermen and Lightermen of the Thames (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 659), 3, iv. Reg. v. Thornton and Others; e. p. Lacon & Co. (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 308; 77 L.T. 26), 9, iii. Remmington v. Scoles (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 1; 76 L.T 667), 12, v. Renshaw v. The Queen Anne Residential Mansion Hotel Co. (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 662; 76 L.T. 611), 2, ii. Rhondda and Swansea Railway Co. v. Talbot (L.R. [1897] 1 Ch. 131; 76 L.T. 694), 16, vi. Richards v. The Queen (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 574), 5, vii. Richmond (Vicar of) v. All Persons, &c. (L.R. [1897] P. 70), 6, iii. Ripon City, the (L.R. [1897] P. 226; 77 L.T. 98), 20, ix. Rolleson, in re; Holt v. Holt (76 L.T. 776), 13, vii. Ross's Charity, in re (77 L.T. 80), 3, v. Rowell v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 194), 17, v. Rumney and Smith's Contract, in re (76 L.T. 800), 22, 111, ii.; 22, v. Rutland, the Edenbridge (Owners of) v. Green (L.R. [1897] A.C. 333; 76 L.T. 662), 20, ii. Ruys v. London Assurance Corporation (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 135; 77 L.T. 23), 20, viii. SAXLEHNER V. APOLLINARIS Co., Ltd. (L.R. (1897] 1 Ch. 893; 76 L.T. 617), 21, 4. Sayad Muhammad Yusuf-ud-din v. The Queen (76 L.T. 813), 8, vii. Sheers v. Thimbleby & Son (76 L.T. 709), 7, v. Sheppard v. Manning; in re Shep pard (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 67; 76 L.T. 756), 14, viii. Simmons v. Underwood (76 L.T. 777), 6, vi. Slater in re; e. p. Slater (76 L.T. 704), 2, iii. Slaytor v. Slaytor & Jackson (L.R. [1897] P. 85), 14, iv. Small v. United Kingdom Marine Mutual Insurance Association (76 L.T. 828), see 22, p. 109. iv.; 20, v. Smith v. Chorley District Council (L.R. [1897] 1 Q.B. 678; 76 L.T. 637), 10, iii. Smith v. Hawthorn (76 L.T. 716), 15, v. Southport Tramways Co. v. Gandy (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 66; 76 L.T. 815), 12, vi. Spiller v. Turner (L.R. [1897] 1 Ch. Spokes v. Grosvenor Hotel Co., Stone v. Press Association (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 159; 77 L.T. 41), 13, ii. Suarez, in the goods of (L.R. [1897] P. 82), 14, vii. Symons v. Symons (L.R. [1897] P. 167), 8, iii. Theodora, the (76 L.T. 627), 5, v. Thornton v. France (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 143; 77 L.T. 38), 18, vi. Tibbit's Settled Estates, in re (L.R. [1897) 2 Ch. 149; 77 L.T. 88), 14, ii. Trevalion v. Anderton (76 L.T. 642), 2, i. Trevor v. Hutchins (76 L.T. 636), 22, 1, vi., and 100, ii.; 19, i. Tronders Anderson & Co. v. North Queensland Insurance Co., Limited (77 L.T. 80), 20, vii. Tucker, in the matter of the Petition of (L.R. [1897] P. 83), 8, vi. Turnbull, in re; Turnbull v. Turnbull (77 L.T. 47), 10, v. Tyne Pontoons Co. v. Guardians of Tynemouth Union (76 L.T. 782), 16, iii. UNIVERSO INSURANCE CO. OF MILAN V. MERCHANTS' MARINE INSURANCE CO. (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 93; 76 L.T. 748), 22, 79, vi.; 20, vi. VIANT V. COOPHR (76 L.T. 768), 15, iv. Viney, e. p.; Eaton & Co., in re (L.R. [1897] 2 Q.B. 16), 2, v. WAINWRIGHT v. MILLER (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 255; 76 L.T. 718), 15, iii. Walker v. Lutyens; in re Walker (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 238; 77 L.T. 94), 23, v. Wavertree Sailing Ship Co. v. Love (L.R. [1897] A.C. 373; 76 L.T. 576), 19, v. Wells v. Gas Float Whitton, No. 2 (Owner of) (L.R. [1897] A.C. 337; 76 L.T. 663), 21, 68, iii.; 21, ii. Wilcox and Gibbs v. James (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 71), 14, i. Wilding v. Sanderson (77 L.T. 57), 22, 102, ii.; 13, iii. Williams and Duchess of Newcastle's Contract, in re (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 144; 76 L.T. 646), 22, vii. Williams v. Williams; in re Williams (L.R. [1897] 2 Ch. 12; 76 L.T. 600), 22, iii. |
