Page images

Walker, Nicholas, High st, Shoreditch, Licensed Victyaller. Mar 14 at 1 at offices of Mallet, John, jun., Great Torrington, Devon, Dairyman. Maroh 21 at 3.30 at offices Lidiard and Co, Gt James st, Bedford row

1 of Thorne, Castle st, Barnstaple Walker, Walter, Bradford, Wholesale Potatoe Salesman. Mar 25 at 10.30 at Victoria Marshall, Nathaniel, Lutton, Northampton, Farmer. March 18 at 12 at offices of Dea. chmbrs, Bank st, Bradford. Darlington

con and Wilkins, Cross st, Peterborough Weston, Alfred, Greenwich, Boot and Shoo Manufactnrer. Mar 20 at 12 at office of Mathew, Thomas Charles, Early mews, Camden Town, Lead Merchant. March 23 at 13 Moss, Gracechurch st

at offices of Ellen, Ohancery lane Whitaker, Charles, Lincoln, Grocer, Mar 15 at 2 at Cannon st Hotel, Williams, Lin. Merrick, Robert, Berrington, Salop, Licensed Victualler. Mar 21 at 11 at offices of coln

Morris, Swan Hill, Shrewsbury White, Martin Luther, and William Batting, the Grove, Stratford, Corn Factors. Mar Millard, William Carey, Farnham, Surrey, Glass Dealer. Mar 20 at 2 at offices of 15 at 4 at office of Franklin, Strand

Vandercom and Co, Bush lane Willacy, Robert, Penwortham, Lancaster, Land Agent. Mar 16 at 2 at office of Black, Miller, Joseph, Blackburn, Shirt Maker. Mar 21 at 11 at the White Bull Hotel, Church Williams Inmaa Pontenool, Boot Manufacturer. Mar 17 at 12 at Grand Hotel, Brond | Miller. William Eaton. Howden, York, Draper. Mar 20 at 12 at offices of England and

st, Blackburn. Needham, Blackburn s Brid : Fonty pool, Boot Manufacturer. Mar 17 at 12 at G

Son, Howden Wood, William, Cheltenbam, Grocer's Assistant. Mar 15 at 3 at office of Stroud and Monk, Albert James, Lower Edmonton, Builder. Mar 22 at 11 at offices of Wolferstan Ryland, Clarence parade, Cheltenham

and Co, Ironmouger lane

Moor, James Maitland Hoar, Birmingham, out of employment. Mar 17 at 3 at office of TUESDAY, March 7, 1882.

Fallows, Cherry st, Birmingham Agger, Joseph Edward, Watcon, Norfolk, Chemist. Mar 21 at 2 at office of Gregson and Ormerod, Edward, Atherton, Lancaster, Engineer. Mar 20 at 11 at office of Holmes and Robinson, Watton

Johnson, Victoria bldgs, King st, Wigan. Part and Co, Wigan Aikman, Robert, Manchester, Printer, Mar 17 at 4 at office of Addleshaw and Warbur Parker, James, Ansley, Warwick, Farmer. Mar 20 at 12 at Newdegate Hotel, Nun. ton, Norfolk st, Manchester

eaton, Close, Derby Armor, John, Denbigh, Licensed Viotuallor. Mar 20 at 12 at office of Parry and Co,

Parnell, Richard, Westminster Bridge rd, Manager to a Loan Omice. Mar 16 at 11 at Vale st, Denbigh

office of Chapman, Pancras lane Ashworth, Henry, Stacksteals, nr Bacup, Grocer. Mar 24 at 3 at Dog and Partridge Inn, Parr, Thomas, Greetland, Halifax, York, Stone Merchant. Mar 20 at 11 at the Crown Fennel st, Manchester. March, Rochdale

Hotel, Horton st, Halifax Rhodes, Halifax Audsley, John, Gawthorpe, York, Spinner. Mar 23 at 10.15 at office of Scholes and Son Pennicard, John, Brighton, Boot and Shoe Maker. Mar 22 at 3 at office of Goodman, Wakefield rd, Dewsbury

North st, Brighton Banister, Albert, Newgate st, Butcher. Mar 20 at 3 at 145, Cheapside. Whittington and Peverley, William, Old Kent rd, Leather Dresser's Manager. Mar 18 at 10 at Finsbury Son, Bishopsgate st Without

sq bldgs, Chiswell st. Whitwell and Co Berry, Charles, Eastbourne, Fishmonger. Mar 28 at 3 at office of Champion and Co, Pierce, Sidney, Farington Gurney, Somerset, Blacksmith. Mar 22 at 2 at office of Terminus rd, Eastbourne

Thatcher, Midsomer Norton Bolton, George, Manningham, York, Timber Merchant. Mar 21 at 3 at office of Watson Poulson, Andrew, Samuel Drought, and John William Coxon, Cuerdley, Lancaster, and Dickons, Cheapside, Bradford

Ironfounders.Mar 27 at 3 at office of Davis and Oo, Market placo, WarringBoon, Nathaniel, Ashby, Lincoln, Chemist. Mar 20 at 2 at offices of Summers, Manor ton st, Kingston upon Hull

Pollington, Edward, Hastings, Builder. Mar 18 at 12 at 37, Southampton bldgs, Chan. Bottle, Henry Alexander, Pertenhall, Bedford, Farmer. Mar 16 at 11 at offices of Wade cery lane. Meadows and Elliott, Hastings Gery, St Neots

Price, John, Kingswinford, Stafford, Licensed Victualler. Mar 18 at 10.30 at offices of Ball, Frederick, Harrow rd, Closed Upper Manufacturer. Mar 18 at 3 at Crown Tavern, Clulow, High st, Brierly hill Clerkenwell gn. Goatly, Long acre

Price, Robert, Willenhall, Stafford, Stamper and Piercer, Mar 17 at 11 at offices of Butterfield, Isaac, Bury, Draper. Mar 22 at 3 at offices of Grundy, Union st, Bury

Clark, New rd, Willenhall Cadman, Arthur, Nottingham, Commisslon Agent. Mar 20 at 3 at offices of Norman,

Pridham, Albert Edward, Llanelly, Carmarthen, Chomist. Mar 21 at 11 at offices of Nottingham

Howell, Stepney st, Llanelly Calderwood, George, Peckham, Draper. Mar 21 at 2 at offices of Soppet, Newgate st. Reddan, James Henry, Birmingham, Gas Engineer. Mar 21 at 3 at offices of Johnson Webb and Son, Barbican

and Co, Waterloo st, Birmingham Carr, William, Blackburn, Mineral Water Manufacturer, Mar 23 at 11 at offices of Rowland, William, Old Kent rd, Boot and Shoe Maker. Mar 23 at 3 at the offices of Wheeler and Fletcher, Blackburn

Kilvington and Stock, Walbrook Case, Robert, Hilgay, Norfolk, Farmer. Mar 22 at 12 at County Court House, Downham Rumball, William Lewis, Richmond Surrey, Fine Art Dealer. Mar 20 at 3 at the offices Market. Reed and Wayman, Downham Market

of Durrant, Guildhall chmbrs, Basinghall st Cash, Joseph Harper, Wilson st, Finsbury, Insurance Broker, Mar 27 at 2 at offices of Skaife, Smith William, West Gorton, Manchester, Provision Dealer. May 20 at 3 at Henry, Holborn

Blackfriars Hotel, Blackfriars st, Manchester. Hill, Manchester Chadwell, Sarah Jane, Oxford, Cutler. Mar 23 at 12 at offices of Galpin, New Inn Hall Smith, John Edward, Paternoster row, Solicitor. Mar 17 at 3 at omces of Butcher, st, Oxford

Bouverie st, Fleet st Craner, Frederick, Welford-on-Avon, Gloucester, Oil Salesman, Mar 20 at 12 at offices Sommerville, Elizabeth Ann, Montague st, Rassel sq, Lodging House Keeper. Mar 31 of Sanderson, Churcb st, Warwick

at 2 at Law Institution, Chancery lane. Thompson and Ward, Bedford row Day, Ezra, Wakefield, York, Shoe Dealer. Mar 20 at 3 at the George Hotel, Wakefield. Spencer John, jun, Netherbury, Dorset, Carpenter. Mar 20 at 10.30 at Greyhound Hotel, Dryden, Wakefield

Bridport. Howard, Melcombe Regis Dearsley, Emma, Sloano st, Millinor, Mar 17 at 2 at the Guildhall Tavern, Gresham st. Stringer, Edwin Harper, Stourbridge, Boot Dealer. Mar 17 at 11 at Talbot Hotel, High Marrable

st, Stourbridge. Collis, Stourbridge Dickinson, Joseph John, Ipswich, Boot Maker. Mar 18 at 11 at offices of Mills, Elm st, Thaine, John, sen, Sea Palling, Norfolk, Farmer. Mar 20 at 3 at office of Sadd and Ipswich

Linay, Theatre st, Norwich Dison, William, Knottingloy, York, Grocer. Mar 20 at 3 at offices of Foster and Raper, Thompson, James, and Samuel Thompson, Farcet, Huntingdon, Farmers. Mar 21 at Ropergate, Pontefract

11.30 at Angel Hotel, Peter borough. Cranfield, St Ives Down, William, Stoke Newington rd, Builder. Mar 20 at 3 at offices of Stewart, Forest Thursfield, William, Mincing lane, Coffee Broker. Mar 27 at 2 at office of Plows and Co, Edge, Mary Ann, Birkenhead, Butcher, Mar 21 at 3 at offices of Hannan and Pugh, Mark lane Duncan st, Birkenhead

Town, Albert. Tennington rd, Fishmonger. Mar 17 at 3 at 214, Kennington pk rd. Fisher, Thomas, Barrow in Furness, Dealer in Iron Ore. Mar 21 at 2 at the Victoria Brunskill, Git james st, Bedford row Hotel. Church st, Barrow in Furness. Barrow, Barrow in Furness

Twamley, George William, Loeds, Grocer. Mar 20 at 3 at office of Craven, East parade, Foden, William, Salford, Lancaster, Grocer. Mar 23 at 3 at the Mitre Hotel, Cathedral Leeds yd. Manchester Creek and Co. Manchester

Walker, Tom, Cockermouth, Cumberland, Ironmonger. Mar 18 at 12.30 at Court house, Grey, Thomas, Bristol, Baker. Mar 21 at 12 at offices of Atchley, Olaro st, Bristol

Cockermouth, Jennings, Cockermouth
Griffiths, David, Bridgend, Glamorgan, Licensed Victualler, Mar 22 at 12.30 at offices / Warwick, William Guy, Bishopstoke, Hants, Farmer. Mar 17 at 2 at office of Guy,

of Randall, Nolton st, Bridgend
Hargreaves, Thomas, Lancaster, Game Dealer. Mar 20 at 11 at offices of Holden and

Albion ter, Southampton

Weaver, Henry Charles, Bath, Baker. Mar 20 at 12 at office of Simmons and Co, Edgar Whelon, Churoh st, Lancaster

bldgs, Bath Harper, Edwin, Prince Teck bldgs, Earl's ort rd, Greengrocer. Mar 24 at 3 at offices of

Wherrett, Henry, Croydon, Baker. Mar 17 at 11 at Green Dragon Hotel, High st, CroyStokes, Chancery lane Harris, Charles, Birmingham, General Dealer, Mar 17 at 11 at offices of Parry, Col.

don. Dennis, Croydon

Whittingham, John, Nantwich, Miller. Mar 20 at 2 at offices of Lisle, Nantwich more row, Birmingham Harvey, David, Chesterton, Cambridge, Cook. Mar 20 at 11 at offices of Wayman,

Wholey, Robert Jarvis, Kingston upon Hull, Licensed Victualler. Mar 20 at 11 at office

of Summers, Kingston upon Hull Silver st, Cambridge Haslett, Alfred, Canterbury Theatre of Varieties, Manager. Mar 20 at 3 at offices of

Wood, James, Llandudno, Dealer in Fancy Goods. Mar 17 at 1 at Erskine Arms Hotel,

Conway. Reece and Co, Birmingham
Reader, Ely pl, Holborn
Hebblethwaite, Jeremiah, Wakefield, Provision Dealer. Mar 18 at 11 at offices of Kemp,

Woodhead, George, Manchester, Printors. Mar 17 at 4.30 at offices of Addleshaw and

Warburton, Manchester
Barstow s, Wakefield
Henderson, Thomas, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Poulterer. Mar 22 at 11 at offices of Scott,

Wright, George, Sheffield, Plumber. Mar 17 at 3 at offices of Clegg and Sons, Victoria White House bldgs, Pilgrim st, Newcastle-upon-Tyne

chmbrs, Sheffield Henrich, Johann George, Redesdale st, Chelsea, out of bnsiness. Mar 16 at 11 at offices

of Dobson, Minories
Hepper, Arthur, Launceston, Cornwall, Seedsman. Mar 17 at 12 at King's Arms Hotel,

Launceston. Cowlard and Cowlard, Launceston
Hillier, Henry, and Henry Hallett, Rochdale, Provision Dealers. Mar 21 at 3 at Dog | CURRENT TOPICS ..... ............ 291: In re Smith's Charity .............. 298
and Partridge Inn, Fennel st, Manchester. Brierley, Rochdale



298 Holt, Alfred, Gorton, Lancaster, Soap Manufacturer, Mar 20 at 3 at offices of Simpson,

MISES CONTRACTED TO BE SOLD.... 292 SOLICITORS' CASES ............... 299 Manchester


299 Howlett, James, Hedon, York, Boot Maker, Mar 20 at 3 at offices of Summers, King.

REVIEWS ......... ...
295 SOCIETIES ......

299 ston upon Hull


OBITUARY .......

301 Humphreys, Edward, Aberystwith, Cardigan, Ship Owner. Mar 23 at 11 at offices of

Hemery v Worssam ...

301 Hughes, Aberystwith

In re Marseilles Extension Railway COMPANIES

301 Hurst, William Jeffrey, Bermondsey, Registrar of Births and Deaths. Mar 20 at 2 at

and Land Company .............. 296 LEGISLATION OF THE WEE

302 offices of Simpson and Palmer, Southwark

The London and South Western Rail. CREDITORS' CLAIMS

302 Hyslop, James, Blackburn, Travelling Draper. Mar 20 at 11 at offices of Wheeler and

way Company y, Gomm .......... 296 COURT PAPERS ......

... 303 Fletcher, Blackburn Irvine, William, Sunderland, Tailor. Mar 21 at 3 at offices of Lawson, Villiers st,

In re The General Financial Bank .. 297 'LONDON GAZETTES, &c., &c...........

In re Ryder ....................... 293
Knight, George, Bloomsbury st, Auctioreer, Mar 23 at 3 at offices of Godfrey, Chan-

cery lane. Hooper
Knight, Henry, Kingsclere, Southampton, Carpenter. Mar 20 at 11 at offices of Lucas, Notices to CORRESPONDENTS.-All communications intended for publication

in the SOLICITORS' JUURNAL must be authenticated by the name and address of Lawton, Frederick Alfred, Stoke upon Trent, Coal Merchant. Mar 18 at 11 at offices the writer.

of Ashwell, Stoke upon Trent Leighton, Francis Henry, Oldbury, Worcester, Factors' Clerk. Mar 20 at 11 at offices

The Editor does not hold himself responsible for the return of rejected communi. of Peel, Birmingham Lomax, Benjamin Howarth, Manchester, Publisher, March 17 at 3 at offices of Nadin,

cations. King st, Manchester

*** The Publisher requests that early application should be made by persons Longman, Albert Thurston, Brent st, Hendon, Builder. March 20 at 3 at the Jamaica Coffee house. St Michael's alley, Oornhill, Warburton and De Paula, West st, Fing. Lumber of copies remain on hand.

desirous of obtaining back numbers of the SOLICITORS' JOURNAL, as only a small bury circug

[ocr errors]



c. H. GRIFFITHS & SONS. Arti-Dyspeptic Cocoa or Chocolate Powder.

THE Guaranteed Pure Soluble Cocoa of the Finest Quality.

SIX GUINEA LEGAL NEST with the excess of fat extracted. The Faculty pronounce it “the most nutritious, per.

MANUFACTURERS AND HOUSE FURNISHERS, SHOULD BE USED BY ALL SOLICITORS, fectly digestible beverage for Breakfast, Luncheon, or 200, 203, and 204, TOTTENHAM COURT ROAD, W.

Supper, and invaluable for Invalids and Children."
Highly commended by the entire Medical Press,
Estimates and Designs submitted free for entirely Fur.

It is the most convenient and durable yet offered to the

Profession. Being without ugar, spice, or other admixture, it suits nishing Residences, Chambers, Offices, &c. all palates, keeps better in all climates, and is four times -PAINTING, DECORATING, & HOUSE REPAIRS.the strength of cocoas THICKENED yet WEAKENED with starch, &c., and IN REALITY CHEAPER than such Mixtures. Carved Oak Furniture, Reproductions from Ancient

Made instantaneously with boiling water, a teaspoonful Designs, &c. Bedroom Furniture, including Bedstead and to a Breakfast Cup, costing less than a halfpenny.

Bedding, from £7 10s. per set. COCOATINA ALA VANILLE is the most delicate, digestible,

THIRTY LARGE SHOW ROOMS. cheapest Manilla Chocolate, and may be taken when richer chocolate is prohibited. In tin packets at 1s. 6d., 38., 5s, 6d., &c., by Chemists


200, 203, and 204, Tottenham Court-road, London, W.
Charities on Special Terms by the Sole Proprietors, N.B.-Household Furniture Warehoured or Removed
U. SCHWEITZER & CO 10, Adam-street, London, W.C. | on reasonable terms.




Rt. Hon. Sir JOIN ROBERT MOWBRAY, Bart., M.P., D.C.L

To Her Majesty, the Lord Chancellor, the Whole of the

Judicial Bench, Corporation of London, &c.

The Report presented at a Meeting, held on the 5th
January last, showed that on the rigorous basis of the BARRISTERS' AND QUEEN'S COUNSEL'O DITTO,
Institute of Actuaries' HM Table of Mortality, with 3 per

cent. interest and net premiums,
The calculated liability was

... £1,970,019

ESTABLISHED 1889. To which further Reserves were added of 116,684

94, CHANCERY LANE. LONDON. Making the Total Reserves ... 2,086,703 And the Assurance Fund being ... 2,433,397


AND SOLICITORS. The Net Surplus was ... ... ... £346,694

STEPHENS' SCARLET INK FOR STEEL PENS. Of this sum, £345,000 was divided-an amount larger This new Ink supplies the demand continually made but by £45,000 than any previously distributed, a'd producing never before met, for a Red Ink which is uninjured by the highest ratio of profit ever declared by the SocietySteel or other Metallic Pens. Steel Pens left in this ink

ԱվտոկայաԿոլյարիստրատուրադյանի viz., a

for months do not impair the beauty of its colour, nor are CASH BONUS OF 32 PER CENT.

the Pens in the least corroded by it. The existing Red on the Premiums of the Five Years.

Inks rapidly destroy Steel Pens, and lose their red colour
if used with other than Gold or Quill Peps. This new

colour is a very rich scarlet red of great beauty. The CLAIMS PAID IMMEDIATELY ON PROOF OF DEATH AND TITLE.

colour of this ink is not affected by use upon parchment The NEXT DIVISION OF PROFITS will be in January,

and is consequently of great value to Solicitors and 1887. NEW POLICIES EFFECTED BEFORE THE END OF


Sold in stone bottles, retail at Is., 28., 3s.; and imperial JUNE NEXT will then rank for Five full Years' Bonus,

quarts of 40 ounces at 6s, each. Also in glass bottles at and so obtain one year's additional share of Profits.

6d. and Is. each,

-- ; T119----
The Report above-mentioned, a detailed account of the
proceedings of the Bonus meeting, the returns made to
LONDON GAZETTE (published by authority) and

Consists of four superior Japanned Deed Boxes, with the Board of Trade, and every information can be LONDON and COUNTRY ADVERTISEMENT

fall-down fronts, and four compartments in each. Secured obtained at either of the Society's Offices, or from any

OFFICE.-No. 117, CHANCERY LANE. FLEET by Hobhs's Pattnt or other Locks. Size 20in, by 13in. by of its Agents.


14in. GEO. CUTCLIFFE, Actuary and Secretary.

N.B.-The price quoted above will not admit of any B. NEWBATT, Assistant Actuary. LENRY GREEN, Advertisement Agent,

discount to Stationers or others.

begs to direct the attention of the Legal Profession Mounted on an elegant iron stand with brass mountings. TAW UNION FIRE and LIFE INSU. to the advantages of his long experience of upwards of C. H. GRIFFITHS & SONS, 43, Cannon-street, E.C. U RANCE COMPANY. Chief Office-126, Chancery. thirty years, in the special insertion of all pro forma

RRAND AND 00.'S OWN SAUCE. ane, London, W.C.

notices, &c., and hereby solicits their continued support.The Funds in hand and Capital subscribed amount to up.

N.B. One copy of advertisement only required, and the wards of £1,600,000 sterling.

strictest care and promptitude assured. Official stamped SOUPS, PRESERVED PROVISIONS, Chairman-JAMES CUDDON, Esq., Barrister-at-Law,

forms for advertisement and file of “ London Gazetto"
Goldsmith-building, Temple.
kept. By appointment.

Deputy-Chairman-O. PEMBERTON, Esq. (Lee & Pember-
tons), Solicitor, 44, Lincoln's-inn-fields.

PIES, also Every description of Fire and Life Insurance business


LAW AND GENERAL STATIONERS, Whole World and Unconditional Life Policies granted at 1 & 2, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, E.C. a slightly increased rate of Premium.

TURTLE SOUP, and JELLY, and other Policies of Insurance granted against the contingency of Issue at moderate rates of Premium. Advances made on Mortgage of Life Interest and Rever

PEULALITIES for INVALIPS. sions, whether absolute or contingent.

Deeds and Writings engrossed and copied on the Premises,

with punctuality and dispatch, at the lowest scale of Prospectus, Copies of the Accounts as deposited with

CAUTION :-BEWARE OF IMITATIONS. charges. A good Discount allowed on agreed accounts. the Board of Trade, and every information sent on appli.

Sole address, cation to



DAVITS, and other PLEADING, Printed at ls, per folio. 7 INAHAN'S LL WHISKY.

in form for Registration. Capital fully subscribed .................. £2,500,000

Discount allowed for cash on agreed accounts.

INAHAN'S LL WHISKY. Pure, Mild Capital paid-up ... ... ... ....... 250,000 LITHOGRAPHY.

and Mellow, Delicious and very Wholesome. Life Funds in Special Trust for Life Policy. holders exceed ... ......

Universally recommended by the Profession. ABSTRACTS, 733,000

Total Annual Premium Income exceeds .. 1,050,000

at reduced prices.


The Cream of Old Irish Whiskies.

with accuracy and dispatch.


Paris Exhibition, 1878; Dublin Exhibition, 1865,

the Gold Medal. Southampton-buildings, Chancery-lane. Samples and Catalogues sent post-free.

20, Great Titchfield-street, London, W. Current Accounts opened according to the usual practice of other Bankers, and Interest allowed on the minimum monthly balances when not drawn below £25. No com


CHEAP mission charged for keeping Accounts. The Bank also

The Medical Profession for over Forty Years have ap. receives money on Deposit at Three per Cent. Interest, repayable on demand. The Bank undertakes for its

proved of this pure solution as the best remedy for Customers, free of charge, the custody of Deeds, Writings, Supersede in one Instrument Pencil, ACIDITY of the STOMACH, HEARTBURN, HEADACHE, and other Securities and Valuables ; the collection of Bills of Exchange, Dividends, and Coupons ; and the

Pen, and Ink.

GOUT and INDIGESTION, purchase and sale of Stocks and Shares. Letters of Credit and Circular Notes issued.

Prices, 1s. to 7s. 6d.

And as the safest Aperient for Delicate Constitutions, A Pamphlet, with full particulars, on application. SEND FOR LIST AND PARTICULARS TO

Ladies, Children, and Infants. FRANCIS RAVEN'SCROFT, Manager. 31st March, 1880.



Law Copying and Engrossing.


receives money on Deposit at Three per Cent. Interest, STYLOGRAPHIC PENS.

LONDON, MARCH 18, 1882.

IN REFERENCE to the convict Lamson, it may be well to point CURRENT TOPICS.

out that, by the present law, property does not the less devolve upon a person because it has been procured by the murder of a

person through whom the right to it accrues. Before 1870 the THE OPENING CEREMONY of the Royal Courts of Justice has !

law was otherwise, as the whole of a felon's property was, by

¡ his conviction, ipso facto forfeited to the Crown. But the Act 33 & been fixed provisionally for the first day of next Trinity Sittings.

34 Vict. c. 23 abolishes forfeiture for felony, and provides that the Crown may commit the custody and management of the property of

a convict to an administrator, who, besides having power to pay the MR. FRANCIS SAVAGE REILLY has been appointed Counsel to debts of the convict, and the costs of his prosecution and defence, the Speaker of the House of Commons, in succession to Mr. G. K. RICKARDS, resigned. Mr. REULY was called to the bar at

support or maintenance of any wife or child, or reputed child of Lincoln's-inn in Easter Term, 1851. He acted as arbitrator such convict, or of any other relative, or reputed relative, of such under the European Assurance Company's Arbitration Act.

convict dependent upon him for support, as to such administrator shall seem fit.” The provision of section 15, that the adminis.

trator may cause to be paid out of the property of the convict GREAT PRESSURE is being applied to urge on the completion of such sum of money by way of satisfaction or compensation for the Royal Courts of Justice by the date suggested by Mr. SHAW

any loss of property or other injury alleged to have been suffered LEFEVRE last week in the House of Commons. Large numbers of

by any person through, or by means of, any alleged criminal or workmen have been employed in completing the details of the

fraudulent act of such convict as to him shall seem just, although central hall and other unfinished portions of the building, and the

no proof of such alleged criminal or fraudulent act may have been fittings of the courts will shortly be placed in position.

made in any court of law or equity," are very wide, and might, perhaps, include the case of compensation to the dependent rela

tives of a murdered person ; but the case of devolution of property THE HOUSE OF COMMons has called for a return “showing procured by murder is unprovided for, and is, perhaps, too rare to the number of registrars, masters, and chief clerks attached to require providing for by law. the Supreme Court of Judicature, and the salaries or fees received by, and the number and length of the days of actual attendance of, each registrar, master, and chief clerk during the year ending IT HAS BEEN SUGGESTED by the jury in the Lamson case that the 31st of October, 1881.".

the sale of poisons ought to be more restricted than it is at present, and the suggestion appears to have sprung from the pre

valent opinion that medical men can procure poisons more easily THE COMPLAINT of a correspondent in a recent number of than other people. The Pharmacy Act provides (section 17) that this journal that deeds or documents cannot be stamped at the certain poisons may not be sold “to any person unknown to the Royal Courts of Justice for either 2s. 6d. or 6d., although they seller, unless introduced by some person known to the seller": can be stamped for various other amounts between 1s. and £5, but that such provision shall not apply to“ sales by wholesale to redeserves the attention of the authorities. The tell-tale stamping tail dealers in the ordinary course of wholesale dealing," nor to “any machines are somewhat expensive, but it would be worth while medicine supplied by a legally qualified apothecary to his patient,” to incur the cost of two new machines to obviate the inconveni- | nor to - any article when forming part of the ingredients of any ence caused to practitioners who have to go to Somerset House.

medicine dispensed by a person registered" under the Act. There is nothing in the Act authorizing the supply ad libitum of poison by

chemists to medical practitioners as such. The case of Berry v. THE DIFFICULTIES which have from time to time arisen in the Henderson (L. R. 5 Q. B. 296), however, shows that a certain Court of Appeal with respect to the costs of shorthand notes of amount of laxity is allowed in the application of the law. There what took place in the court below have as to notes of the a person unknown, and not introduced, brought a prescription to evidence, been settled by several cases, but as to shorthand notes be made up, which was signed by the initials of a medical man ; of the judgment there appears to remain some uncertainty. In and it was held that the dispensing chemist could not be convicted, the case of The London and South-Western Railway Company v. although there was no evidence that the person for whom the preGomm (ante, p. 296), the Master of the Rolls is reported to have scription purported to be intended was an existing person. It would said that the court had read the report of the judgment of Kay, seem to be reasonable to require that the name and address of the preJ., in a current series of reports, which had only been recently scribing medical practitioner should be furnished to the dispeosing published, “ but if the printed report had been published some chemist. With respect to the sale of arsenic, it may be noticed that time before the hearing of the appeal, the costs of the written the exception in the Arsenic Act (14 & 15 Vict. c. 13) applies only copies of the judgment would not have been allowed.” It is hard to sale by prescription, or by wholesale to retail dealers,“ upon to understand the precise drift of this ruling if it extends orders in writing in the ordinary course of wholesale dealing," to the costs of the transcript. Some reports are published and the exception in the Pharmacy Act provides that where mediweekly, others monthls, but no reports, whenever published, cine containing poison is sold, it is to be “labelled with the invariably contain all the cases reportable which have been name and address of the seller," and that the ingredients are to be decided since the last previous date of publication. It is im- entered “ with the name of the person to whom it is sold or possible for solicitors to know whether a case which is going to delivered, in a book to be kept by the seller for that purpose.” the Court of Appeal will be reported at any given time. It will be asked, after what the Master of the Rolls has said, how long an appellant is to wait after his appeal is set down before he takes BOTI THE Criminal Law Amendment Bill, “to prescribe the a transcript of the shorthand notes of the judgment ? Some procedure in England and Ireland relative to indictment or explanation of the rule laid down by the Master of the Rolls , information for the punishment of offenders, and to provide appears to be necessary.

appeal in criminal cases,” which is brought in by Mr. KOPWOOD

and other members, and the Criminal Procedure Bill, “ to prescribe the procedure by indictment for the punishment of offences THE LIMIT TO THE DOCTRINE OF against the criminal law,” which is brought in by Mr. Gorst and

TULK V. MOXHAY. Mr. ARTHUR BALFOUR, reproduce, to a very great extent, and often word for word, the provisions of part 7 of the well-known

From a very early period in the history of English law, covenants Criminal Code (Indictable Offences) Bill. The Amendment Bill of certain kinds relating to land have possessed the peculiar contains 133 clauses, the Procedure Bill 110. Following in the property that the obligation created by them was not merely main the order of their model, they deal with committal by justices personal to the covenantor, but might also, under appropriate and bail, with the whole of criminal pleading, with the mode of circumstances, bind the representative in title of the covenantor trial and challenges of the jury, and with appeal, new trial, and

eir trial, and to whom the land had passed by assignment. The doctrine of costs. In neither of the Bills is there any schedule of repealed

the common law upon this subject is exceedingly obscure, and the Acts, though it is obvious that there is an implied repeal of some

highest authorities are much divided in opinion with regard to it. score of them, the so-called “Indictable Offences Act, 18 18”.

But, so far as concerns the most numerous and important class of (Jervis's Act, No. 1, 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42), being the most import

these cases, the common law has, for three and a half centuries, ant of them. There are many new provisions, however, of more

been superseded by the statute 32 Hen. 8, c. 34 ; and this in turn, or less interest, the principal novelty being a very stringent clause

though not repealed, has, at least to a great extent, been superas to the power of search. The clause which gives power to examine seg

seded by sections 10, 11, and 12 of the Conveyancing Act, 1881.

on These covenants are said to run with the land at law, and the defendants is to be found in the Amendment Bill only, which prorides, in quite different phraseology from that of the Criminal

cases which involve their consideration may be divided into two Code (Indictable Offences) Bill, that “everyone proceeded against

principal classes, according as there is, or is not, privity of estate by indictment for any offence shall be a competent witness for him

| between the covenantor and the covenantee. The former class self or herself (why this provision for a female defendant, looking

embraces those cases in which the covenant is between the lessee to 13 & 14 Vict. c. 21?) upon his or her trial for such offence,

and his lessor. The latter division embraces those much more and the wife or husband, as the case may be, of every such

obscure and difficult cases, of which The Prior's case, cited by Lord accused person shall be a competent witness for him or her, or with

Coke in Spencer's case, is the prototype, where no privity of his or her consent for any other [sic] jointly indicted with him or

estate, in respect of the lands affected by the covenant, subsists her upon such trial; provided that no such person shall be liable

between the covenantor and the covenantee. These last covenants to be called as a witness by the prosecutor, but every such witness

are still subject to the common law, so far as regards their called and giving evidence on behalf of the accused shall be liable

capacity to run with the land to which they relate. The rules by to be cross-examined, like any other witness on any other matter,

which they are governed are exceedingly obscure and of very though not arising out of his examination in chief.' Provided that!

at limited application; and we do not propose to enter upon the inso far as the cross-examination relates to the credit of the accused,

vestigation of them. the court may limit such cross-examination to such extent as it

The statute of Hen. 8, c. 34, which largely extended the benefit thinks proper, though the proposed cross-examination might be

of these covenants, as between lessor and lessee, by largely extend. permissible in the case of any other witness.” The wording is

ing the circumstances under which they could be sued upon, did clumsy, but the intention is good.

not at all extend the scope of the covenants in the sense of causing any covenants to run with the land which would not equally have

run with the land before the statute. Though the words of the IF THE PRESSURE of business should prevent any large

statute are very wide, they were reasonably restricted by the al:eration of the criminal law in the present session, we

courts to this meaning ; see Spencer's case, ad fin. would express an earnest hope that that small portion of

The definition of these covenants remained drawn upon the the two Criminal Law Amendment Bills, or of the Criminal

narrow lines of the common law. The same need which had Code, which deals with pleading only, may be passed.

originally operated to obtain from the common law a limited

As the law at present stands, it is still necessary, when a person

recognition of the principle of running with the land, became is indicted for publishing a libellous book, to

much more pressing with the progress of time in consequence of

copy out in the indictment all the passages alleged to be libellous.

the increasing number of ways in which land could be, and

The amending Bills propose (see Criminal Code, Form Q. Q.) to allege

frequently was, employed. In particular, the common law rules in the indictment that the defendant published a libellous book,

were very inadequate to meet the requirements of owners and and to acnex a marked copy of the book to the indictment

hirers of building lands, when these became the subject of extensive Other, but not quite so obvious, amendments of the present

operations. It was probably a sense of this need, much more than ridiculous system of pleading will occur to everybody versed in

the somewhat doubtful considerations of equity urged by Lord the subject. As for the Criminal Code itself, the reason why it

Cottenham in his judgment, which both gave rise to the decision has made so slow a progress in the House of Commons is plain.

of Tulk v. Moxhay (2 Phill. 774), and also procured for that Since the brilliant opening speech of Lord Justice HOLKER in |

| decision the almost unparalleled run of success which it afterintroducing the measure about three years ago, the House of

wards met with. The principle there laid down has been conCommons has never had the slightest opportunity of considering lit its most general shape, may be expressed by saying that a

tinually pushing its ramifications in all directions. This principle, it. The view that the House of Commoos can no more make a code than paint a picture has been pressed too far, and the Bill

covenant relating to land, but not by the rules of law running was referred prematurely to the Royal Commission. We hope land with notice of the covenant.

with the land, shall in equity bind the terre-tenant if he took the

The doctrine was not only laid that it may be introduced and discussed early, and be referred down in very wide terms by Lord Justice Knight Bruce to a joint select committee of the two Houses of Parliament.

in De Mattos v. Gibson (4 De G. & J. 276), but its application was apparently extended to all property

whatever. “ Reason and justice," he observed, “ seem MR. EDWARD COOPER Willis, has been appointed one of her to prescribe that, at least as a general rule, where a man, by gift Majesty's Counsel. Mr. E. C. Willis was called to the bar in

or purchase, acquires property from another, with knowledge of a 1865.

previous contract, lawfully and for valuable consideration made by

him with a third person, to use and employ the property for a On the 10 h inst., in the House of Commons, Mr. Hicks a-ked the

particular purpose in a specified manner, the acquirer shall not, to Attorney-General whether be had now come to a decision as to the way ia

the material damage of the third person, in opposition to the con. which he would deal with the present waste of judicial power, and the great tract and inconsistently with it, use and employ the property in a incony, nience caused to jurors and others by the present sys'em (f holding manner not allowable to the giver or seller.” In that case the four assizes. The Attorney-General said that he saw no reason for departing property in question was a ship ; and it was laid down that a from the system that no one should remain in custody without trial for a long r| period than three months. But it was under the consideration of the Gurerr.

legal mortgagee having taken his charge with notice of a contract bow far the inconvenience resulting to the judicial beach and to jarors of charter-party previously made by the mortgagor, might bo might be mitigated.

restrained from using the ship inconsistently with the contract;

[ocr errors]

- -and an interim injunction to that effect was actually granted, though it afterwards happened, owing to peculiar circum THE BILLS OF SALE ACT AMEND. stances, that the Bill was dismissed. The above cited passage,

MENT BILL, which obviously includes all chattels in its scope, was quoted with approval by Lord Justice Selwyn in Catt v. Tourle | THE somewhat crude Bill introduced in the House of Commons in (L. R. 4 Ch. 654, at p. 657). The earlier case of Wilson v. Hart 1881 to amend the Bills of Sale Act was, as our readers are (L. R. 1 Ch. 463), had decided that constructive notice is sufficient aware, referred to a Select Committee, who, after hearing a great to bring a purchaser within the meaning of the principle. It is mass of evidence and considering the replies to the circular sent evident that the two last-mentioned cases contain within them the by the Lord Chancellor to the county court judges and registrars, germs of a very wide development; and the courts for a good amended the

a good amended the Bill and reported it to the House. The Bill made many years showed no signs of intending to restrict their growth. | no further progress, but this session it has been re-introduced by

But a remarkable step has recently been taken in this direction Mr. Monk, and in its present form it deserves the careful attention by the case of Haywood v. Brunswick Permanent Benefit Building of our readers. Society (30 W. R. 299). The facts of this case, so far as they are

evarel One of the most important proposals is that of clauses 4, 5, and material, were as follows:-In 1866 Charles Jackson granted certain

6, the effect of which, if passed into law, will be to do away with lands in fee simple to Edward Jackson, partly in consideration of a | the practice of including after-acquired property in bills of sale. rent-charge limited in fee simple to Charles Jackson by way of use, / It is proposed to provide that: and partly in consideration of the covenants on the part of Edward L "14.) Every bill of sale shall have annexed thereto, or written thereon, a Jackson contained in the deed. Among these covenants was a schedule containing an inventory of the personal chattels comprised in the bill covenant to pay the rent-charge, and another expressed to be entered of sale ; and such bill of sale, save as hereinafter mentioned, shall have effeot

only in respect of the personal chattels enumerated in the said schedule ; and into by Edward Jackson “ for himself, his heirs, executors, and shay

shall be void in respect of any personal chattels not so enumerated. administrators," that he would, within two years, erect and keep “(5.) Save as hereinafter mentioned, a bill of sale shall be void in respect in repair buildings of the annual letting value of double the of any personal chattels enumerated in the schedule thereto of which the rent-cbarge. The rent-charge, with all the remedies in respect of it, grantor was not the true owner at the time of the execation of the bill of

sale, was afterwards assigned to the plaintiff, and the lands were legally |

“ (6.) Nothing contained in the foregoing sections of this Act shall render mortgaged to the defendant society, who subsequently entered into a bill of sale void in respect of any of the following things; (that is to say), possession. The society having in 1880 failed to pay the rent " (1) Any growing crops separately assigned or charged where such crops charge and to keep the buildings in repair, an action was brought, 'were actually growing at the time when the bill of sale was executed. among other things, for an injunction to restrain the defendants

(2) Any fixtures separately assigned or charged, and any plant or trade

machinery where such fixtures, plant, or trade machinery are used in, from committing further breaches of the covenant to repair, and

attached to, or brought upon any land, farm, factory, workshop, shop, to compel specific performance of that covenant. Mr. Justice

house, warehouse, or other place in substitution for any of the like Stephen gave judgment for the plaintiff, holding that, though the fixtures, plant, or trade machinery enumerated in the schedule to such covenant did not at law run with the land, yet the defendants,

bill of sale." being mortgagees in possession, and having had notice of the

As to the policy of this proposal, opinions differ widely, but we covenant, were bound to perform it. This judgment was unani

think that many who are favourable to it will admit that, as at mously reversed by the Court of Appeal, consisting of Brett,

present framed, the clauses are too sweeping. The effect will Cotton, and Lindley, LJJ., upon the ground that the covenant

probably be to abolish altogether bills of sale of stock-in-trade, for, did not at law run with the land, and that the doctrine of since the scheduled articles will be disposed of in the way of Tulk v. Moxhay is applicable only to restrictive covenants

trade, of course, the security of the creditor will be constantly forbidding the user of the land in certain prescribed ways-pos

diminishing. We do not, however, object to this. There is a sibly (according to Lord Justice Brett) with the addition of such

great deal to be urged in favour of abolishing altogether bills of covenants as, when enforced, would constitute a burden upon the

sale of stock-in-trade, whether present or future. As has been land. This decision has very recently been referred to with

several times pointed out in these columns, it is tolerably certain approval by the Court of Appeal in the case of The London and

that a trader who gives such a bill of sale is involved in serious South Western Railway Company v. Gomm (ante, p. 296).

embarrassment, and the bill of sale very seldom enables him to It is certainly a remarkable thing that in cases where, as intide over his difficulties. Wholesale dealers generally rely on the Tulk v. Moxhay itself, the covenant was partly of an affirmative

stock-in-trade of their customers as a test of the amount of credit character, binding the covenantor positively to do something, they will give. The result is that bills of sale of stock-in-trade do including, inter alia, an obligation to keep a piece of ground in little good to the trader, and occasion greatloss to his trade creditors. good repair as a pleasure-garden, the injunction of the court | If, therefore, the proposal of the Bill were confined to the stockseems to have dealt only with that part of it which was of a in-trade of traders, as defined in the Bankruptcy Act, we should negative character. The injunction in that case did not attempt be disposed to give it our support. But is there any solid reason for to compel the defendant to keep the garden in repair, but only preventing a man who is not a trader from dealing with his restrained him from building upon it or using it otherwise than as present or future property as he may think fit? There is a large a pleasure-garden. This distinction seems to have been present

class of persons who make a livelihood by letting furnished to the mind of Lord Chancellor Cranworth when, in De Mattos v.

lodgings (without supplying provisions to their lodgers) who would Gibson, he said :-“ Although a court of equity cannot compel a probably be seriously inconvenienced if the provision as it now stands specific performance of the contract” (which was in that case a | is passed into law. . They can usually only obtain credit upon their positive contract of charter-party), “yet it will restrain the

furniture, and cannot pay off the debt rapidly, and the value of employment of the vessel in a different manner.”

the security will probably be greatly diminished if it is only to It must be borne in mind that the doctrine of Tulk v. Moxhay extend to the furniture and effects scheduled in the bill of sale and its attendant cases has never yet come for review before the which are constantly wearing out. There ought, at all events, House of Lords. Probably this fact may be taken as a fresh to be inserted a provision excepting from the operation of the evidence that on the whole the doctrine is salutary and consonant clauses we have referred to effects brought upon the premises with public convenience. But some of its later extensions, in substitution for articles enumerated in the schedule. notably the two to which we have above adverted, look as though

Clause 7 is intended to convert into law the decision of the they might perhaps not pass unscathed through the ordeal of the Common Pleas Division in Davis v. Goodman (28 W. R. 150). supreme tribunal. Meanwhile we may remind the reader | afterwards reversed by the Court of Appeal. It is proposed to of the opinion formerly expressed by us, that section 65 of the

repeal section 8 of the Act of 1878, which avoids an unattested Conveyancing Act has, though evidently without intending it, and unregistered bill of sale in certain cases only, and to provide supplied a convenient machinery for binding lands in perpetuity by that “ every bill of sale shall be duly attested, and shall be registered such covenants as are commonly used by owners of building land.

under the principal Act within seven days after the execution

thereof, . : . and shall truly set forth the consideration for The incandescent electric light is to be tried in the new courts at the Royal / which it was given, otherwise such bill of sale shall be void in Courts of Jostice.

respect of the personal chattels comprised therein."

« PreviousContinue »