plaintiff or the trustee: Held that the action had abated.—Eldridge v. Burgess, L.R. 7 Ch. D. 411; 38 L.T. 232; 26 W.R. 435.

(lix.) Ch. Div. F. J.-Abatement-Several Defendants.-Where two of five defendants jointly and severally liable to plaintiff had become bankrupt : Held the action might proceed against the other defendants, without giving notice to the trustees in bankruptcy.-Lloyd v. Dimmack, L.R. 7 Ch. D. 398; 38 L.T. 173; 26 W.R. 458.

(lx.) C. J. B.-Bill of Sale-Fraudulent Preference.-A. lent money to B., the latter verbally promising to give a bill of sale when required; no bill was required till four years afterwards, when, A. being dead, his executor, hearing rumours of B.'s insolvency, obtained from him a bill of sale, which comprised substantially all his property: it was agreed that the bill of sale should not be put in force unless the other creditors of B. were pressing him, of which he was to give notice: he gave the executor notice of a process issued against him, and the executor thereupon seized and sold the goods by a sale advertised only three days before it took place: Held that the giving the bill of sale was a fraudu. lent preference, and the proceeds of the sale must be paid to the trustee in bankruptcy.-Ex parte Bolland, In re Gibson, 26 W.R. 481.

(lxi.) C. A.-Composition-Appeal-Costs.-Decision of C.J.B. (see Bankruptcy xl., p. 43) affirmed.-Fx parte Hopper, Re Elliott, 26 W.R. 488. (lxii.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.-Composition-Debtor's Dominion over Property.— A debtor who has effected a composition with his creditors has full power to dispose of his property until the composition has been set aside and the debtor adjudged bankrupt on proceedings taken under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 126.-In re Kearley and Clayton's Contract, L.R. 7 Ch. D. 615; 38 L.T. 92; 26 W.R. 324.

(lxiii.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Composition-Fraud on Creditors.- Where a creditor, at the time of signing a composition, took from the debtor a private agreement that the debtor should make certain future payments on his account: Held that the debtor could recover back from the creditor the payments subsequently made under the agreement.-In re Lenzberg's Policy, L.R. 7 Ch. D. 650; 47 L.J. Ch. 178; 26 W.R. 258. (lxiv.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.-Covenant to Settle-Contingent Interest.-A trader, who is entitled under his father's will to a share in his property, subject to a power for the widow to appoint among himself and the other children, is possessed of such an interest therein that a covenant made on his marriage to settle his share will not be void under s. 91 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869.-In re Andrews' Trusts, L.R. 7 Ch. D. 635; 38 L.T. 137.

(lxv.) C. J. B.-Debtor's Summons - Staying Proceedings - Security.-A debtor's summons being issued against a solvent debtor, proceedings were stayed without security, it appearing that there was a bonâ fide question in dispute, on the result of which the debt depended.—Ex parte Brown, In re Brown, 37 L.T. 834; 26 W.R. 284.

(lxvi.) C. A.-Liquidation-Apparent Possession-Discharge.-Where a debtor, permitted by the trustee to retain possession of his furniture, holds himself out as the owner thereof, the trustee not having notice, does not thereby forfeit his right to it: a discharge by joint creditors does not discharge the debtor from separate debts.-Meggy v. Imperial Discount Co., 26 W.R. 342 (affirming Q. B. Div., 47 L.J. Q. B. 119).

(lxvii.) C. A.-Liquidation.-No Assets.Where a debtor's statement shows that he has no assets available, and it appears that the procedure of the Court is resorted to for an idle purpose, the registrar ought not to register resolutions for liquidation by arrangement.-Ex parte Aaronson, In re Aaronson, 38 L.T. 238; 26 W.R. 470.

(lxviii.) C. A.-Mortgage Attornment Clause - Distress-Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 34.-A mortgage of smelting works for £55,000 contained a proviso that, if the mortgagor payed interest punctually, and did not become bankrupt or part with the mortgaged property, the mortgagee would not call for payment of the principal for five years, and the mortgagor attorned tenant from year to year to the mortgagee at the yearly rent of £20,000, payable on the days on which the interest on the mortgage debt was payable: the letting value of the property was not more than £3,000 per annum. On the bankruptcy of the mortgagor; Held that s. 34 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, did not protect a distress, levied by the mortgagee for the rent, on the chattels on the estate.-Ex parte Williams, In re Thompson.-L.R. 7 Ch. D. 138; 47 L J. Bcy. 26; 37 L.T. 764; 26 W.R. 272.

(lxix.) C. J. B.-Order and Disposition-Share of Partnership.-A., a partner, mortgaged his share in the partnership property and business to B.: the deed was not registered as a bill of sale, and the property remained in the occupation of the firm until the bankruptcy of A.: Held that A.'s interest in the partnership was a chose in action other than a debt within s. 15, sub-s. 5, of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, and that the property comprised in the deed was not in the order and disposition of A. at the time of the bankruptcy.—Ex parte Fletcher, In re Bainbridge, 38 L.T. 229; 26 W.R. 439.

(lxx.) C. J. B.—Restraining Proceedings.-The members of a firm who were trustees under a will being made bankrupts, an action was brought in the Chancery Division for administration of the estates of the testator against the bankrupts and others, and charging the bankrupts with breaches of trust and fraud, and a receiver was appointed who took possession of the estate and effects of the bankrupts, and was carrying on their business for the benefit of the testator's estate. The Court, on the application of the trustee in bankruptcy, refused to restrain the administration.-Ex parte Charlton, In re Charlton, 38 L.T. 295; 26 W.R. 468.

(lxxi.) Ch. Div. V. C. B.-Trust Deed for Benefit of Creditors-Knowledge of. -Statement of claim alleging that A. had executed a deed whereby he assigned to defendants all his property in trust for payment of his debts, that he became bankrupt, that defendants had received money under the deed, and applied it in payment of some creditors to the exclusion of plaintiff, and asking for accounts and administration of the debtor's estate. A demurrer on the ground that there was no allegation of any communication having been made to the plaintiff of the execution in favour of creditors of the deed was over-ruled.-Johns v. James, 37 L.J. 778; 26 W.R. 276.

(lxxii.) C. J. B.-Undischarged Bankrupt -Damages in Action for Slander.Damages recovered by an undischarged bankrupt in an action of slander, do not form part of his property divisible among his creditors within s. 15, sub-s. 3, of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869.-Ex parte Vane, In re Wilson, 26 W.R. 482.

(lxxiii.) P. C.-Vendor's Lien.-Under an arrangement with the purchasers, the vendors of goods retained possession of them, the purchasers paying them warehouse rent: Held that the vendor's lien for unpaid purchase. money revived on the insolvency of the purchasers.—Grice v. Richardson, L.R. 3 App. 319; 37 L.T. 677; 26 W.R. 358.

Bill of Exchange:

(iii.) C. P. Div.-Acceptance.-Since the passing of 19 & 20 Vict., c. 97, 8. 6, to constitute a valid acceptance of a bill of exchange there must be some word or words written on the face of the bill indicating an intention on the part of the drawee to be bound by it as acceptor.-Hindhaugh v. Blakey, L.R. 3 C.P.D. 136; 38 L.T. 221; 26 W.R. 480.

(iv.) C. A.-Acceptance by Partner-Bill drawn in Blank.-If a third person take a bill drawn in blank, which was to his knowledge signed by a partner as acceptor in the name of the firm, he cannot, without authority from the firm, fill in his own name as drawer so as to recover on the bill against the firm.-Hogarth v. Latham, 26 W.R. 388.

(v.) C. A.—Cancellation.-Defendant advanced to plaintiff £15,000 on the security of bills of exchange accepted by S. and goods: on a bill being dis. honoured, plaintiff, to prevent a sale of the goods, gave defendant a cheque as collateral security, to be returned when the bills were paid in full: subsequently plaintiff consented to a sale, in order to effect which defendant agreed with S., without plaintiff's knowledge, to cancel the bills: Held (affirming the decision of the Q.B. Div., L.R. 3 C.P.D. 60; 38 L.T. 181; 26 W.R. 269) that plaintiff could not recover the cheque till the £15,000 was paid in full-Yglesias v. River Plate Bank, 26

W.R. 454.

(vi.) P. C.-Re-exchange.-A firm of L. & Co. carried on business in London and Australia: by arrangement with W., the London firm drew bills on the Australian firm payable to W.'s order: being unable to negociate the bills in London, they were sent out to Australia, where they were dishonoured and returned to W. in England: Held that the dishonour did not entail on W. such damages as to entitle him to re-exchange Willans v. Ayers, 37 L.T. 732.

Bill of Sale :

(iv.) C. J. B.-Registration-Description of Grantor.-A tailor's cutter, whose wife also kept a school and took lodgers, was described in a bill of sale which he executed as "a tailor's cutter": Held insufficient for the purposes of the Bills of Sale Act, 1854.-Ex parte National Deposit Bank, In re Wills, 38 L.T. 264; 26 W.R. 375.

Building Society:

(iv.) C. A.-Arbitration-6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32-10 Geo. 4, c. 56, s. 27.-The rules of a benefit building society, enrolled under 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 27, and not re-registered under the Building Societies Act, 1874, provided that disputes between the society and members should be referred to arbitration: Held that this did not apply where the relation of mortgagor and mortgagee existed.—Lord v. Mulkern, 47 L.J. Ch. 228; 38 L.T. 265; 26 W.R. 319.

(v.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Default of Secretary-4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 40, s. 12.A building society will not be deprived of its prior claims on the estate of a deceased defaulting secretary in respect of his defalcations merely on the ground of want of care and diligence in examining the accounts of the secretary.-Moors v. Marriott, L.R. 7 Ch. D. 543.

(vi.) Ch. Div. V. C. B.-Mortgage-Fine.-Fines imposed by the rules of a benefit building society and covenanted to be paid in a mortgage deed by a member, are part of the principal money secured by the mortgage, and where an account is decreed, are included under the term "principal interest and costs."-Provident Permanent Building Society v. Greenhill, 38 L.T. 140.

Canada, Law of:

(ii.) P. C.-Appropriation of Payments-Recission-Pleading.—The giving a cheque by the debtor with the intention of appropriating it to the plaintiff's debt, and the giving a receipt therefor by the plaintiff's agent, acting within the scope of his authority, constitute, by the law of Canada, an appropriation as intended, which can only be changed by a recission with consent of all parties: Such a recission must be specially pleaded if relied on.-Kershaw v. Kirkpatrick, L.R. 3 App. 345.

Charity :

(ii.) C. A.-Will-Gift of Yearly Sum-Accretion.-Testator by his will left two sums of £1,000 each to be invested in land of the value of £60 a-year each, to be applied to two different charitable objects: the objects of one of the charitable trusts failing partially, an Act was passed in 1772 to enable the trustees of the charity to apply the income of certain accu mulations, after satisfying the £60 a-year "if required," for the objects of the other charitable bequest: Held that the effect of this Act was to give the whole income of the fund of the charity which failed, which should not be required for that charity, to the purposes of the other charitable trusts.-Attorney-General v. Duke of Northumberland, 38 L.T. 245.

Common:

(ii.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Pannage.-A right of pannage gives the grantee no right to restrain the owner of the wood from cutting down timber or lopping trees in the ordinary course of management.-Chilton v. Cor. poration of London, L.R. 7 Ch. D. 562; 26 W.R. 474.

(iii.) Ch. Div. F. J.-Prescription-Profit à Prendra.-By a bye-law of the homage, occupiers under the freeholders and copy holders of a manor were declared entitled to certain rights of common therein: Held that such rights could have no legal existence.-Austin v. Amhurst, L.R. 7 Ch. D. 689; 38 L.T. 217; 26 W.R. 312.

Company:

(1.) C. P. Div.-Allotment-Conditional Promise to Dispose of-Refusal to Accept.-Plaintiff contracted to build a ship for a company to be paid for by instalments, the last instalment to be partly in paid-up shares of the company at par, on delivery of the ship: subsequently the chairman and managing director of the company, who formed together a separate partnership under the name of G. & Co., wrote to the plaintiff a letter signed G. & Co., whereby they declared they would do their best to dis. pose of the shares to be assigned to the plaintiff, and that they did not expect that they would have to call on the plaintiff to take the shares up: Held that this letter did not bind the company; that the duty of G. & Co. as to disposing of the shares was only to try and dispose of them after they became due, on delivery of the ship; and that the plain. tiff, having afterwards continued to require payment in cash instead of shares, the company were not bound to allot shares at the time of the delivery of the ship.-Macmillan & Son v. Liverpool and Texas Steamship Co., 38 L.T. 288.

(li.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.-Contract by Promoters-Adoption.-A company can adopt a contract made by its promoters when it was not in existence. -Spiller v. Paris Skating Rink Co., L.R. 7 Ch. D. 368; 26 W.R. 456. (lii.) C. A.- Directors' Liability-Promotion Money-Improper Payments.S. agreed with E., the equitable owner of a colliery, to get up a company, to buy it at a large advance on the price agreed to be paid by E., S. to pay preliminary expenses, and S. and E. to share profits equally: S. procured certain persons to be directors, agreeing to pay for their qualification shares (£500); and these persons, before the incorporation of the company, agreed to pay S. £3,500 promotion money on allotment: the articles of the company provided that the directors might pay out of capital expenses incurred in formation, and that the capital should consist of £100,000: only £15,000 was subscribed for besides paid-up shares issued to the vendors: the directors paid S. £3,500 and he paid each of them £500 for their qualification shares: Held that the payment to S. was a misapplication of the Company's funds, for which the directors were jointly and severally liable under s. 165 of the Companies' Act, 1862.-Re Englefield Colliery Co. Ex parte Wingrove, 38 L.T. 112.

(liii.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Reduction of Capital-Practice.-In proceedings for the reduction of a company's capital, the use of the words "and reduced" may be dispensed with both during the interval between the presentation and the hearing of the petition and from and after the order thereon.-In re Langdale Chemical Co., 26 W.R. 434.

(liv.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Transfer of Shares-Fraud.-The owners of shares having deposited the certificates and a signed transfer by way of security, the transferee fraudulently purported to transfer the shares, and handed over the certificate to mortgagees for value: the transferee had not been put on the register, nor executed an acceptance, which was necessary for registration: Held that the mortgagees, after becoming aware of the true ownership, could not get their title perfected against the owners by further acts on the part of the mortgagor. When a transfer of shares under seal is executed with the transferee's name in blank, the shares being transferable by parol instrument, the transfer will be effectual like a parol instrument.-Ortigosa v. Brown, 47 L.J. Ch. 168; 38 L.T. 145.

(lv.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.-Transfer of Shares-Registration.-A company of unlimited liability by its deed of settlement provided that the directors should have power to approve or disapprove of any person proposed by a shareholder as transferee of shares: the company was provisionally registered under 7 & 8 Vict., c. 110: Held that the directors had no power to refuse to register a transfer, except on personal objection to the transferee.-Moffatt v. Farquhar, L.R. 7 Ch. D. 591; 38 L.T. 18.

(lvi.) Ch. Div. V. C. B.-Winding-up-Appropriation-New Company.— The T. company, who at the time owed A. a balance of £1000, were wound up voluntarily, and transferred their business to a new company formed under the same name, which took over the business, and undertook to pay the debts of the old company: A. continued dealing with the new company believing it to be the old company; and in November, 1875, had received from them payments sufficient to discharge the debt of the old company, but was owed on balance £1,500: the new company was wound up, and afterwards the old company, compulsorily: Held that A. could not claim to appropriate the payments of the new company to their debts, and prove against the old company for the £1000.-Re Taurine Co., Anning and Cobbs' Claim, 38 L.T. 53.

(lvii.) Ch. Div. V. C. M.-Winding-up-Contributory-Past Member-Costs. -Where a member of a mutual insurance association ceased to be a mem. ber under the rules, but afterwards, on the winding-up, consented to be put on the list of contributories, and paid a call with a view of obtaining payment of a sum due to him on an insurance, and subsequently the policies of the association were held to be illegal: he was held still liable to contribute towards the costs of the winding-up.-Re Queen's Average Association, Ex parte Lynes, 38 L.T. 90; 26 W.R. 432.

(lviii.) C. A.- Winding-up- Contributory — Director's Qualification. — The articles of a limited company, after naming original directors and giving them power to appoint new directors, provided that no person should be qualified to be a director who was not the holder of £500 in shares; and that no person except the original directors and their appointees should be qualified who had not been such a holder for at least six months: J. was appointed, and attended several meetings, but never applied for or obtained shares: Held that his appointment was void, and he could not be put on the list of contributories.-Re Percy & Kelly, Nickel, &c., Co., Jenner's Case, L.R. 7 Ch. D. 132; 47 L.J. Ch. 201; 37 L.T. 807; 26 W.R. 291.

(lix.) C. A.-Winding-up-Contributory-Fully paid-up Shares-CertificateEstoppel.-Where a company issues certificates of shares as fully paid-up, it is thereby estopped, as against a transferee without notice, from alleg.