Page images
PDF

that tbe salt was obtained by pumping up brine-water from a depth of 150 feet and more, and then evaporating the same. The brine-water was formed by the percolation of rain-water through strata of rock salt, and it was proved that if it was not pumped up, it was drawn off to other distant •hafts, or found its way to the sen. Hall, V.C., held that the proposed lease, so far as it dealt with the brine, would not fall within the sab-section of the statute, and gave an unconditional sanction to it.—Solicitors, Cunliffe, Beaumont, $ Davenport.

Married WomanRestraint On AnticipationPower or Court To Bind InterestConsent Of Married Woman—Conveyancino And Law Of Property Act, 1881, s. 39—Separate Use—Power Of AppointmentPayment Of Debts.—In a case of Hodges v. Hodgei, before Fry, J., on the 3rd inst., a question arose as to the exercise of the power which is given to the oourt by section 39 of the Conveyancing Act of 1881, to remove a restraint on anticipation which is imposed on an estate limited to the separate estate of a married woman. Section 39 provides that, "Notwithstanding that a married woman U restrained from anticipation, the court may, if it thinks fit, where it appears to the court to be for her benefit, by judgment or order, with her consent, bind her interest in any property." The facts were these. A testator who died in 1843 bequeathed a legacy to trustees, on trust to pay the income to his daughter for her life, for her separate use, without power of anticipation; and after her death to hold the legaoy on certain trusts for the benefit of her children. And, in case she should die without leaving any child or children, then to hold the fund in trust for such persons and in such manner as the daughter, whether covert or sole, should by will appoint, and, in default of appointment, in trust for the daughter absolutely. The suit was instituted in the Court of Chancery, in 1845, to administer the testator's estate, and an administration decree was made in that year. Tbe daughter's legacy was invested and carried over to a separate account for herself and others in succession. In 1874 she married a Frenchman, who was a domiciled French subject, and was residing iu France. A contrat dt marriage, according to French law, was executed in France upon the marriage, but it did not affect in any way the fund in court, and no other settlement affecting that fund was made. In 1882, there having been no issue of the marriage, and the wife being fifty-five years of age, an application, by summons in the suit, was made on behalf of the wife (by a next friend) and the husband, asking that, notwithstanding the restraint on anticipation imposed by the will, an order might be made, pursuant to section 39 of the Conveyanoing Act, 1881, that a part of the fund in court shonld be sold, and the proceeds of sale paid to the wife on her separate receipt. The wife made an affidavit, in whioh she said that she had daring several years past been contracting debts with tradespeople and others, in the neighbourhood where she lived in France, in excess of her means of payment, and that she was then indebted to the extent of several hundreds of pounds, and was being much harassed by ber creditors, who, knowing that she was entitled to a large sum in the Court of Chancery in England, were causing her very great annoyance and trouble by their importunity. A letter was also in evidence, written by the wife to the solicitors who had issued the summons, urging them in the strongest terms to obtain the money for her. No one was served with the summons, and no one appeared in opposition to it. It was urged that it was clearly for the benefit of the wife that she should be freed from the annoyance caused to her by her creditors. Fry, J., said that under the circumstances he thought it would be for the benefit of tbe wife that the restraint on anticipation should be removed to the extent asked by the present application, and he was prepared to exercise the power given to him by section 39 for that purpose. The next question was whether, that restriction being removed, a part of the oapital of the fund should be paid out to her. She had no ohild and was now past the age of child-bearing. According to the decision of Hall, V.C, in In re Harvey't Estate (28 W. R. 73, L. R. 13 Ch. D. 216), if she should execute the power of appointment given to her by tho will, her appointees wonld take subject to the payment of her debts contracted on the faith of her separate estate. And, if she did not exeroisa the power of appointment, it was equally clear that her executors would take the fund, subject to the payment of the same debts. Therefore, quacunque via, the fund would, after her death, be subject to the payment of her debts. His lordship therefore thought that the order asked for might be made. He had felt some donbt whether be onght not to require the attendance of the married woman to be separately examined as to her consent. But he understood that in other branobes of the oourt this formal consent bad not been required under section 39, and, therefore, he would not require it in the present case. Bat at the same time he thought it was worthy of consideration whether upon an application of this kind a separate examination of the married woman should not he taken, for there was great danger that such applications might be made without the knowledge of the married woman.—Solicitors, Harting, Son, § Mis.

Practice— Motion To Vary Minutes—Production Of Copy Of RegisTrar's Note.—In a case of Robinson v. The Local Board pr Barton, before Fry, J., on the 3rd inst., a motion was made to vary the minutes of an order on a speoial case pronounced by his lordship on the 27th of February. Fry, J., granted the application. And he said that when such a notice is made the solicitor of the moving party ought to make a previous application to the registrar who was in court at the time when the order was made, for a copy cf tbe note which he then entered in his book, and this copy onght to be produced in oourt on tbe hearing of the motion. This wonld prevent the delay which would otherwise be caused by the judge having himself to apply to the registrar for his note.—Solicitors, Byrne f Lucas; Le Riche $ Son.

Common Appurtenant Limitation Validity Of Custom Prescription Act (2*3 Will, 4, c. 71}, 1. 1,—In a case of Morley Y.

before Fry, J., on the 4th inst., tbe question was raised a olaim by prescription to an nnlimited right of common on

Clifford,

whether _

the waste of a manor, in respeot of a copyhold tenant of the manor, could be a valid olaim. There did not appear to be any modern authority on the point directly applicable. Fry, J., said that the only right whioh oonld be claimed under section 1 of the Prescription Aot was a right whioh oould lawfully exist at common law. The law on the snbjeot was thus stated in Crnise's Digest (4th ed.), vol. 3, p. 67 :—" Common appurtenant may be for cattle without number, or for a oertain number only; and may be appurtenant to a manor by prescription, or by grant,-made since time of memory ; and that as well for a oertain number of cattle as without number; where it is without number, it is restrained to cattle levant and couchant on the land to which it is annexed. Therefore, if a person olaims oommon by prescription on the land of another, for all manner of commonable oattle as belonging to a tenant, this is a void prescription, because he does not say that it is for oattle levant and couchant on the land." And this statement was fully borne out by what was said in Rolle's Abridgment, p. 398.—Solicitors, Morley j- Shireff; Woodbridge <£• Sons.

Bill Of ExchangeAlteration After AcceptanceNeolioencb Of AcceptorRights Of IndorseeStamping After Alteration.—In a case of Adelphi Banl v. Edwards, before Cbitty, J., on the 4th inst., an important question was raised as to whether the indorsee of a bill of exchange conld recover on the bill under the following circumstances :—The bill was drawn for £22 2s., payable four months after date in London, but before the figures 22 and after tbe word London blanks were left which were filled in by the insertion of the figure 2 so is to make the bill to be for the sum of £222 2s., and the words "Two hundred and "were also iuserted. The bill was impressed with a stamp for 3s., capable of being used for a sum of £300. The defendant pleaded as a defence that the bill was altered in a material part after acceptance, and was, therefore, void ; to which the plaintiffs replied that the defendant had contributed by his negligence to the fraud, and, therefore, was not entitled to raise the objection. Another defence was raised that the bill was void, as it was not stamped after the alteration. Cqittt, J., said that the alteration in a material part voided the bill unless the defendant had precluded himself from raising the objection. He did not think the defendant, who was a Welsh farmer, could claim any indulgence on that ground, and that the same rule must apply whether the defendant was a farmer or a director of the Bank of England. There had been no actual representation by the defendant, as the plaintiffs had not inquired of him whether the bill in its present form had been accepted by him, so that the only question wag whether he could Impute negligence to him. He considered the case covered by that of the Socie'te Qinirale v. The Metropolitan Bank (21 W. R. 335). The plaintiffs, no doubt, relied greatly upon the ease of Young v. Grole (2 Bing. 453) and some more recent cases, but in Young v. Grots the case was one of banker and customer, and the customer, by giving a blank cheque whioh was subsequently filled in for a larger amount than he had intended, had himself contributed to the fraud. Moreover, there the oustomer did not sue on the cheque, but for the balance of his account. Tbe present case was also distinguishable from those where the acceptance had been in blank. Two Scotch cases had been relied upon, but he did not think they governed this case, and he thought the loss must remain where it had fallen, that was, on the plaintiffs, who had trusted tho drawers, and against whom they would have their remedy over. The defence that the bill was stamped before the alteration was, in his opinion, also a good one, and the Stamp Act clearly required a hill of exchange to bo stamped after any alteration which in effect made it a new bill. On the whole, therefore, there most be judgment for the defendant with costs. He would, however, allow a stay of execution pending an appeal, if an appeal were brought within fourteen days. —Solicitors, Brock $ Chapman; Toulmin <b Son; C. Richards Son.

Vendor And Purciiaser—Loss By FirePayment By Insurance ComPany To VendorRight To Obtain Repayment—Contract Of Indemnity —In a case of Castellain v. Preston, before Cbitty, J., on the 4th inst., an important question was argued, whether an insuranoe company oould reoover from a vendor of property oertain policy-moneys in respeot of a fire on the property, after the contract for sale, where the whole purohase-money bad been subsequently paid to the vendor. In the oaae of Rayner v. Preston, an action brought by the purohaser against the same defendant, olaiming an abatement out of the purohase-money in respeot of the policy-moneys, or a direotion that they might be applied in reinstating the property, Cotton and Brett, L.JJ., James, L.J., diss., held (L. R. 8 Ch. D. 1) that the purohaser was not entitled to either form of relief, and that the aotion must be dismissed. Cotton and Brett, L.JJ., however, suggested that the insurance company might be entitled to reoover the amount paid from the vendor, and hence this aotion was subsequently brought by the insurance company for the amount, and tbe case was tried at the last assizes by Cbitty, J. After argument, upon farther consideration, Cnirrv, J., held that there was no express authority upon the point, and therefore that it must be considered upon principle. The question really was whether the principle of subrogation applied, as in suoh cases as North British, frc, Company v. London, Liverpool, and Globe Insurance Company (L. R. 6 Ch. D. 569) and /Simpson v. Thomson (L. R. 3 App. 279). In tbe present case, however, he was asked to go much beyond any previous decision, and he considered the oontract of insurance here was one entirely collateral to the oontraot of sale. The result was that, in his opinion, the aotion failed, and that the same malt be dismissed, with costs.—Solicitors, Laces, Bird, Newton, $ Richardson, Liverpool; Anthony it Imlach, Liverpool.

CompanyWixding-ttp PetitionFormal Affidavit Verifying PetiTionEffect Of Such Affidavit Dealing With Measubes Of InformaTion And BeliefRule 4, General Orders, November, 1862.—In a case of In re New Callao Company, alao before Cbitty, J., on the 4th inst., on the opening of a winding-up petition the objection was taken that tbere was no sufficient evidence of the facts stated in the petition. The usual formal affidavit verifying the petition bad been filed under rale 4 of the General Orders under the Companies Act, 186S ; but this affidavit also went into other matters, and stated the deponent's information and belief as to the allegations in the petition. It was oontended by the company who opposed the petition that the affidavit could not be relied on, as the formal affidavit made primd facie evidence by rule, as it went beyond such formal affidavit, and, so far as it dealt with matters of information and belief, such statements were not evidence in reliance on Gilbert v. Eiidean (L. R. 9 Ch. D. 259). It was therefore contended that there was no evidence in support of the petition. Chitty, J., said he did not think the affidavit was less the formal affidavit meant by the rule because it dealt with other matters, and that even if the allegations as to information and belief were not evidence, still the effect of that would simply be to avoid that part of the affidavit, and not to affect the formal part verifying the petition. He, therefore, held there was sufficient primd facie evidence in support of the petition, and he accordingly gave the respondents leave to adduce evidence in answer, reserving the question of costs.—SoliCitors, Greenfield is Abbott; Lewis Davis.

SOLICITORS' CASES. High Court Of Justice.Queen's Bench Division. (Sittings in Banc, before Grove, J., and Huddleston, B.). March 30.—In the Matter of E. D. Lewis, a Solicitor. Candy moved, pursuant to notice, that an attachment should issue against the defendant for a contempt of court in disobeying an order made a few days ago.

Murphy, Q.C., appeared for the defendant to oppose the motion.

The order in question was to deliver up to the present solicitors of Mr. Maitland certain papers and documents in possession of the defendant, who, up to February 28, had acted as solicitor to Mr. Maitland, and who will shortly be tried for perjury at the Old Bailey. On the above date the court, acting on a report of Master Melior, had held that Mr.Lewis discharged himself, as be said he would not go on acting, or tantamount to it, unless Mr. Maitland brought him £30 more than the fifty guineas already paid him by Mrs. Heath, who entered into a contract in writing with the defendant for him to defend Maitland at the police court.

Candy said the only doouments banded over to the present solioitor of Mr. Maitland were some newspapers, programmes, letters, and play-bills, which had no bearing on the criminal oharge whatever.

Murphy said his olient claimed to retain the brief he had drawn np for counsel, copies of depositions, for which he had paid £1 7s. 6d., and oflioial oopies of documents. These, he oontended, were not "belonging" to the oliecfc, but were the frnit of his own outlay and industry. Mr. Maitland had, in faot, paid nothing, and Mrs. Heath did not complain of the scale of the defendant's charges. The order had been virtually oomplied with, and there had been no wilful disobedience on the part of Mr. Lewis.

Grove, J., thought the rule should be made absolute for an attachment. The court had not looked at the form of the rule, and that, perhaps, might have been made more speoifio ; but enough had been said to show that it bad been evaded. It was idle to suppose the order merely applied to the irrelevant matter handed to the client. In his judgment, Mr. Lewis had been amply and more than amply remunerated, and he was not pushed by his olient into any straits or impoverished condition. He thought the doouments did belong to Maitland, thongh with a lien on them for the solicitor's costs; at all events, within the meaning of the order, whioh was that they were to be returned undefaced in twelve days after the trial to the defendant. To allow such a compliance would be utterly to frustrate and disobey the order of the court. Mr. Maitland's whole defence at the Old Bailey might be out short and destroyed for want of these papers. He (the learned j ndge) felt convinoed that the defendant knew perfectly well that he was evading the order of the court when he handed the useless papers over.

Huddleston, B., thought a gross and scandalous oontempt had been committed by the defendant, who must have known the intention of the court, and have set himself deliberately to evade that authority whioh they were bonnd to vindicate.

Bale absolute, with costs.—Times.

On Tuesday last leave to appeal in the case of Copp v. lynch and the Law Life Assurance Company was again refused by Mathew and Cave, JJ., Mathew, J., remarking that "the onlyeffeot of the decision was that solioitors, if they received commission in such cases, must let their clients know that they received it; so that it should be received openly and < above board.' That was all, and how was that of importance?"

Mr. Justice Hawkins has fixed the following dates for holding the ensuing Spring Assizes on the Western Circuit—viz., for the county of Somerset and the county of the city of Bristol, at Taunton, Tuesday, April 18; for the counties of Devon and Cornwall, at Exeter, Monday, April 24; and for the counties of Southampton, Wilts, and Dorset, at Winchester, Tuesday, May 16, Mr. Baron Huddleston has fixed the following dates for holding the Spring Assizes on the Oxford Cirenit:—Reading, Tuesday, April 18; Worcester, Saturday, April 22; Stafford, Friday, April 28.

SOCIETIES.

BARRISTERS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION.

The annual meeting of this association was held in the Middle Temple-hall, on Friday, the 31st ult. Lord Justice Brett presided.

Mr. Macrory read the report, which stated that the growth of the demands on the association was rapid, but no equivalent increase was found in its funds. Daring the past year the subscriptions received were £186 less than in the preceding twelve months, amounting only to £963. Applications for relief were numerous and urgent, but many most deserving cases were necessarily refused assistance. The report referred with regret to the death of Sir John Karslake, one of the trustees, whose place was taken by Mr. Jnstice Manisty.

Lord Justice Brett, in moving the adoption of the report, said that on the Northern Circuit whenever a sum was wanted every member of the circuit subscribed a guinea, those who supposed themselves in good business subscribed two guineas, end all Qieen's Counsel gave three guineas. He did not think it would he at all a bad plan if the Attorney and Solicitor General, the heads of the bar, were to send round a ciroular to every member of the bar and ask him, in support of that society, to allow his name to be put down for at least a guinea.

Mr. S. Prentice, Q.C., treasurer of the Middle Temple, seconded the resolution.

The Recorder of London and Mr. Justice Mathew moved and saoonded a resolution appointing Mr. Justice Manisty one of the trustees.

Lord Coleridge, in moving the election of the committee of management, said he always thought the Barristers' Benevolent Institution the most valuable institution in connection with the profession, and he regretted that it did not receive a larger amount of support. Of course, no man would feel that all his charity was done when he subscribed to an institution of that kind. He could not for one instant believe that the sources of his generosity dried up beoause he supported a society which did that for him which he could not do personally; but there were numbers and numbers of persons to whom a little help from lime to time, such as this society could give, was a matter of paramount necessity. The Lord Chief Justice then referred, with much feeling, to the death of Sir John Karslake, to whose great qualities he had tried to bear public witness as he could to the virtues of one who for many years had been his greatest opponent and his greatest friend. He was one of the most genial, high-minded, and generous men.

The meeting was also addressed by the Attorney-General (Sir H. Jamesj Q.C.), the Solicitor-General (Sir F. Herschell, Q.C.), Vice-Chancellor Hall, Mr. Baron Huddleston, Mr. Murphy, Q.C., Mr. Baron Pollock, Mr. B. E. Turner, and Mr. Justice Manisty, who said that out of 7,000 gentlemen who were really or nominally members of the profession, only 633 subscribed to the society.

LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL.

LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY. Tuesday, Maroh 28.—Mr. O. E. Barry in the ohair.—Messrs. W. E. Johnson and II. J. Randolph Hemming were elected members of the society. Mr. Prankerd opened the question, "Should the Chnroh of England be disestablished aud disendowed?" in the affirmative. After a very ani mated debate, extending over three hours, in the oonrse of whioh MessrsT. P. Rhys, T. B. Napier, and W. A. Bilney supported the opener, and Messrs. Fargus, Prioe, W. Austin, Strickland, J. Van Sommer, Hiok, and R. B. Pope the negative, a division waB taken, whioh resulted in the question being negatived by a majority of one vote. The number present was thirtyseven.

UNITED LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. At a meeting held at Clement's-inn-hall, on Wednesday, Maroh 22, Mr. B. T. Bartrum in the ohair, Mr. Mott Whitehouse moved, "That the laws of England ought to be codified." The opener was supported by Messrs. Tillotson, Spence, Symes, and Blaokwell, and opposed by Messrs. Clarkson and Jenks. Mr. Mott Whitehouse having replied, the motion was pnt to the meeting, and carried by a majority of nine votes.

BIRMINGHAM LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.

A meeting of this society was held on the 14th ult., Alfred Canning, Esq., in the chair. Several new honorary «ad ordinary members were elected, and other business transacted, after which a debate took place on the subject:— "Are the legal difficulties whio J have been suggested as attendant upon the construction of the proposed Channel Tunnel worthy of serious consideration?" Tbe speakers on the affirmative were, Messrs. Streetly, Platnauer, Steere, Jeffreys, G. T. Edwards, and E. C. Rogers; and on tbe negative, Messrs. T. A. Jenkyn Brown, Barrows, Whitaker, and Ryland. The debate, which was an interesting one, was carried in the negative by a majority of one. There was a large attendance of members and a few visitors.

The 702nd ordinary meeting of this sooiety was held on Tuesday, the 28th of Maroh, A. G. Boiler, Esq., in the ohair. The subjeot for debate was, " Is Hobbs v. The London and South-Western Railway Company, viewed in the light of reoent decisions, a safe guide as to the law on remoteness of damage?" The chief reoent decision referred to was that of McMahon v. Field (L. B. 7 Q. B. D. 691), deoided last year. The speakers on the affirmative were Messrs. Ryland, W. Thompsoa, Stevens, and Coley; and on the negative, Messrs. G. T. Edwards, Atkins, and Coohrane. The debate was decided in favonr of the affirmative by the casting vote of the chairman.

MANCHESTER LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. The eleventh meeting of the session of this Booiety was held on Tuesday evening, March 28, at the Law Library, Cross-street, the ohair being taken by Mr. J. W. Hamilton, LL.B., barrister-at-law. The question for discussion was as follows:—" Is Hobbs v. London and South- Western Railway Company, viewed in the light of recent decisions, a safe guide as to the law on remoteness of damage?" Hobbs v. London ani South- Western Railway Company (L. B. 10 Q. B. D. Ill), LilUy v. Doubleday (L. R. 7 Q. B. 510), McMahon y. Field (L. B. 7 Q. B. 591). The affirmative was opened by Mr. Solly, and he was supported by MeBsrs. Qibb, Higham, Brooks, Coward, and Hawkins. For the negative there spoke Messrs. Branthwaite, Fox, Hayner, and Carr. The chairman summed np the arguments, and on the voting being taken the question was deoided iu the affirmative by a majority of one. Members present, 28.

OBITUARY.

MR. THOMAS WOODCOCK. Mr. Thomas Woodcock, solicitor, of Haslingden and Ramebottom, died on the 9th ult. Mr. Woodcock was born in 1810. He was admitted a solicitor in 1833, and he bad practised for many years at Haslingden. He was associated in partnership with bis sons, Mr. John Woodcock, who was admitted in 1863, and Mr. Thomas Woodcock, junior, who was admitted in 1865. He was a perpetual commissioner for Lancashire, and he had a very extensive private practice. He was registrar of the Haslingden County Court (Circuit No. 4), and was formerly clerk to the county magistrates, in which position he had been succeeded by his eldest son.

MR. EDWARD AUGUSTUS HILDER. Mr. Edward Augustus Milder, solicitor, of Gravesend, died on the 21st ult., In his seventy-first year. Mr. Hilder was born in 1811. He was admitted a solicitor in 1836, and had practised for many years at Gravesend. He was a perpetual commissioner for the county of Kent, and bad a very extensive private business. Mr. Hilder also held several important appointments. He had been for several years high bailiff of the Gravesend and Dartford County Courts (Circuit N«. 48), and clerk to the deputy-lieutenants for the Gravesend Distriot of the county. He was also coroner for the borongh of Gravesend. A few years ago he^was appointed a magistrate for the borough.

NEW ORDERS, &c.

HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE.
Chancery Division.
Notice.—Easter Vacation, 1882.

There will be no sitting in oourt <n the Easter Vacation.

During the vacation all applications which may require to be immediately or promptly heard are to be made to the honourable Mr. Justice Kay, at Judges' Chambers, Royal Courts of Justice.

In any case of great nrgenoy, when not sitting in judges' chambers, the brief of oonnsel may be sent to the Vaoation Judge by book-poBt, or paroel, prepaid, accompanied by office copies of the affidavits in support of the application, and also by a minute, on a separate Bheet of paper, signed by counsel, of the order he may consider the applioant entitled to, and an envelope capable of receiving the papers, and addressed as follows:— 'Chancery Official Letter: To the Registrar in Vacation, Chancery Registrars' Office, Chanoery-lane, London, W.C."

On applications for injonotiona or writs of nc exeat regno, in addition to the above, there must aUo be sent the original writ, or a copy of it with the indorsements thereon, a copy of the statement of olaim (if any), and, if the original writ is not sent, a certificate that it has been issued.

The papers sent to the vacation judge will be returned to the registrar.

The address of the vaoation judge when not sitting in judges' chambers can bi obtained on application at the Chancery Registrars' Chambers, Boyal Courts of Justice (Boom 136).

The chambers of Mr. Justice Chitty will be open on Saturday, April 8, from 11 till 1.

On Good Friday, and on Monday and Tuesday in Easter week, the judges' chambers and Chancery offices will not be open : ord. 61, r. 4. Chancery Registrars' Chambers, April 6, 1882.

The committee for promoting a memorial to the late Mr. Street met on Tuesday in the central hall of the Boyal Courts of Justice, when, on the proposal of the Prince of Wales, it was resolved to place a full-length figure of the lamented architect in one of the bays of the central hall, Mr. H, H. Arattead, E.A., was selected as the sculptor.

LEGAL APPOINTMENTS.

Mr. Charles Dyke Acland, barrister, who has been elected M.P. for the Eastern Division of the County of Cornwall in the Liberal interest, is the eldest son of Sir Thomas Dyke Acland, Bart. He was born in 1842, and was educated at Christ Church, Oxford. He was called to the bar at the Inner Temple iu Michaelmas Term, 1869, and he is a member of the Western Circuit.

Mr. Thomas Penny, solicitor (of the firm of Bullock & Penny), of Berkham pstead, bos been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

Mr. Augustus Henry Maule, solicitor, of Newnhum and Lydney, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

The Hon. William Macnaghtbn Erskinb, barrister, has succeeded to the Peerage on the death of his father, the fourth Lord Erskine. The new peer was born in 184L He was for several years a captain in the 9th Lancers, and he was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inu in Trinity Term, 1873. He has practised in the Chancery Division.

Mr. William Jesse Freer, solicitor (of the firm of Freer, Reeve, Blunt, & Rowlatt), of Leicester, has been appointed by the high sheriff of Leicestershire (Mr. William Winterton) to be Under-sheriff of that connty for the current year. Mr. Freer was admitted a solicitor in 1875.

Mr. Edward Cresswell Peele, solioitor, of Shrewsbury, has been appointed by the high sheriff of Shropshire (Mr. James Jenkinson) to be Under-Sheriff of thit county for the ourrent year. Mr. Peele is town clerk of the borough of Shrewsbury, and clerk to the county magistrates. He was admitted a solicitor in 1868.

Mr. Riohard Hughes Priicbard, solicitor (of the firm of Hughes Ac Pritchard), of Bangor, has been appointed by the high sheriff of Carnarvonshire (Mr. Joseph Evans) to be Under-Sberiff of that county for the current year. Mr. Pritchard was admitted a solicitor in 1875.

Mr. Thomas Dewhurst Lingard, solioitor, of Manchester, has been appointed by the high sheriff of Rutlandshire (Mr. John William Davenport Hindley), to be Under-Sheriff of that county for the ourrent year. Mr. Lingard was admitted a solicitor in 1870.

Mr. Thomas Walters, solioitor, of Carmarthen, has been appointed by the high sheriff of Carmarthenshire (Mr. Frederiok Lewis) to be UnderSheriff of that oonnty for the ourrent year. Mr. Walters was admitted a

solioitor in 1876.

Mr. John Lloyd Griffiths, solioitor aud notary, of Beaumaris and Holyhead, has been appointed by the high sheriff of Anglesea (Mr. Hugh Edwards) to be Under-Sheriff of that connty for the current year. Mr. Griffiths was admitted a solioitor in 1865. He is town clerk of the borough of Beaumaris.

Mr. Francis Teegonwell Johns, solioitor, proctor, and notary, of Blandford, has been appointed by the high sheriff of Dorsetshire (Mr. Charles Hambro) to be Under-Sheriff of that oounty for the ourrent year. Mr. Johns) is registrar of the Blandford County Court, distriot probate registrar, and registrar of the Archdeaconry of Dorset. He was admitted a solioitor in 1843, and he is in partnership with Mr. Sinolair Traill, the clerk to the Blandford Looal Board.

Mr. Edward Lamb Wauoh, solioitor, of Cookermoutb, has been appointed by the high sheriff of Cumberland (Mr. George Routledge) to be UnderSheriff of that oounty for the ourrent year. Mr. Wangh is the son of Mr. Edward Waugh, solioitor, M.P. for Cookermouth. He was admitted a solicitor in 1873.

Mr. George Charles Kent, solioitor, of Longton, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the Aoknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women for Staffordshire and the City of Lichfield.

Mr. Humphrey Thomas Crowtheb Gwynn, solicitor (of the firm of Gwynn, Nunneley, & Gwynn), of Bristol and Thornbury, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women for Gloucestershire and Somersetshire, and the City of Bristol.

Mr. Benjamin Bonnbr, solicitor, proctor, and notary, of Gloucestershire, has been appointed a Magistrate for that city. Mr. Bonner was admitted a solicitor in 1852. He is secretary to the Bishop of Gloucester, and registrar of the diocese.

Mr. William Charles Cripps, solioitor, of Tunbridge Wells, has been appointed Solicitor to the Tunbridge Wells Freehold Land Society, in succession to his father, the late Mr. William Charles Cripps, senior.

Mr. George Layton, solioitor (of the firm of Radoliffe, Layton & Steel), Liverpool, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the Aoknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women.

DISSOLUTIONS OF PARTNERSHIPS. Horace Collins, Thomas Wilkinson, and J. Watson Stockee, solicitors, 88, London-street, Greenwiob. March 24. The business will henoeforth be continued by Horace Collins and Thomas Wilkinson.

[_Gazetle, Maroh 31.]

Horatio William Soutkall and William Thomas, solicitors, 24, Waterloo-street, Birmingham (South*!!, Thomas, & Soutball). Maroh 25. The said Horatio William Southall will in future carry Oh business at No. 32, Waterloo-street aforesaid, and the said William Thomas will continue to carry on business at No. 24, Waterloo-street, aforesaid.

[Gazette, April 4.]

COMPANIES.

WINDING-UP NOTICES. Joint Stock Companies. Limited In Chanceby. Capital Fibb Insurance Association, Limited,—Petition for winding up, presented Mar 25, directed to be heard before Chitty, J., on April 22. Howard and Co, New Bridge st, solicitors for the petitioner English Mouitt Manueactueing Company, Limited.—Chitty, J., has, by an order dated Mar 20, appointed Alfred Audrey Broad, 86, Walbrook, to be official liquidator G Enebal Financial Bank, Limited.—Bacon, V.C., has fixed Wednesday, April 12, at

12, at his chambers, for the appointment of an official liquidator Ltdxey And Lydbeook Stxbl And Tin Plate Company, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented Mar 27, directed to be heard before Hall, V.C., on April 21. Phelps and Co, Gresham st, solicitors for the petitioner New Hey Cotton Spinning And Manufacturing Company, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented Mar 22, directed to be heard before Hall, V.C, on April 21. Gregory and Co, Bedford row, agents for Wright, Bacup, solicitor for the petitioner Whitwohth Park Grand Stand Company, Limited.—Hall, V.C., has, by an order dated Mar 15, appointed Benjamin Smyrke, Sunderland, to bo official liquidator

[Gazette, Mar. SI J

Columbia Mabket Genebal Co-opbbative Stobxs, Limited.—Hall, V.C, has fixed Apr 18 at 1 at the Royal Courts of Justice for the appointment of an official liquidator Five Aets Alliance Co-operative Society, Limited.—Hall, V.C., has by an order, dated Mar IS, appointed Charles Minshull, 19, Change alley, to be official liquidator. Creditors are required, on or before May 10, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to the above. May 17 at 1 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims Hawkstoe China Clay Company, Limited.—Kay, J., has by an order, dated Feb 7, appointed Herbert Ernest Matthew Davies, 5, Queen st, Cheapside, to be official '. Creditors are required, on or before May 1, to send their names and , and the particulars of their debts or claims, to the above. May 15 at 12 is 1 for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims Standabd Cbedit Company, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented Mar 29, directed to be heard before Hall, V.C., on Apr 21. Solomon, Finsbury pavement, solicitor for the petitioner Steakax And Company, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented Apr 1, directed to be heard before Fry, J., on Apr 21. Phelps and Co, Gresham st, solicitors for the

Bus Elbcteic Lisht Compaity, Limited.—Creditors are required, on or before May 10, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to Henry Threlkeld Edwards, 66, Coleman st. May 23 at 12 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims

[Gazette, April 4.]

Unlimited In Chanceby. Potteries, Shrewsbury, And North Wales Railway Compaity.—Petition for winding up, presented Mar 30, directed to be heard before Fry, J., on April 21. Markby and Co, Coleman st, solicitors for the petitioners

Brighton Aquarium Company.—Petition for to be heard before Fry, J., on Apr 21. Hughes and i solicitors for the petitioner

[Gazette, Mar. 31.] ented Apr 1, directed ord st, Covent Garden,

{Gazette, April. 4.] County Palatine Op Lancaster. Hanlby Ahd Bucknbll Coal Company, Limited.—By an order made by the V.C., dated Mar 23, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Newail, Ashton under Lyne, solicitor for the petitioners

[Gazette, April 4. J

Stannaries Op Cobnwall. Callington Consols, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented Mar 25, directed to be heard before the Vice-Warden, at the Law Institution, Chancery lane, on Monday, April 17 at 3. Affidavits intended to be used at the hearing, in opposition to the petition, must be filed at the Registrar's Office, Truro, on or before April 15, and notice thereof must at the same time be given to the petitioner, his solicitors, or their agent. Cock, Truro, agent for Snell and Co, George st. Mansion House, petitioner's solicitors

[Gazette, Mar. 31.]

Feiendlt Societies Dissolved. Evening Stab Lodge Leicester Independent Obdir Op Odd Fellows, Old Plough Inn, Wigston, Leicester. Mar 30

[Gazette, April 4.]

At tbe Worship-street Folioe Court on Saturday, Mr. Bushby gave his decision regarding au application made on behalf of a firm of cigar makers fo r summonses against two female appreutioes, who having, since their signing of their indentures, married, now repudiated the contract. Mr. Bushby said he had carefully considered the matter, and he was of opinion that the marrisge of the apprentices had rendered the contract void. He therefore refused to grant the summonses. He had searched the law reports, and could find nothing directly bearing on the point, and he should, therefore, be glad if the applicants would apply for a mandamut, Bo that the matter could be argued before a superior court. Mr. Abbott said he had no doubt his clients would take that course, as it wag a matter of great importance, not only to them, but to all large firms who were employers of female labour.

At the Stock and Share Auction Company's sale, held on Tuesday at their sale-room, the following were amongst the prioea obtained :—Fort Philip and Colonial Gold Mining, 3s. 6d. ; Pary's Copper Corporation £1 shares, 10s.; Consolidated Mining, 3s. 6(3.; La Plata Mining £2 shares, par; Devon Friendship Mining £l shares, 5s. 9d.; South Darren Mining £1 10a. shares, 15s. ; Tocopilla Copper Mining and Smelting £1 shares, 7s. 6d. paid, 9s. 6d.

Perfect Daylight.—Chappuis' Reflectors supersede gas in daytime, and improve natural daylight. They can be adapted to any window, fanlight, skylight, aroa-light, ex., wherever natural light is impeded owing to the had construction of premises or the proximity of walls or buildings. They will be found to promote health, comfort, and economy. They can also be used as screens or blinds, and at the same time they act as daylight diffuscrs. More than 30,000 are in use in London alone. For prospectuses, address two stamps to (S, J.) Chappuis, patentee, and inanulaeturer, o», Fleet-street,— [Ann.]

CREDITORS' CLAIMS.

CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. LAST DAY OF PROOF. Andbbws, Geoege, Gt Suffolk st, Southwark, Sorter in the General Post Office. April

17. Andrews v Joslin, Fry, J. Naunton, Cheapside Abchbb, William Robson, Lowestoft. April 14. Balls v Archer, Chitty, J. Stevens, Norwich

Bancbopt, John, Sheffield, Gentleman. April 18. Baker v Buxton, Chitty, J. Porrett, Sheffield

Beome, Margaret, Bath. April 29. Martindale v Freeman, Hall, V.C. Gordon, New Broad st

Haywood, William, Littleham, Devon, Farmer. April 29. Haywood v Haywood,

Hall, V.C. Adams, Exmouth Millington, John, Leicester, Brick Maker. May 1. Millington v Millington, Hall,

V.C. Curtis, Leicester

[Gazette, Mar. 21.]

Francis, William Gbobge Knapp, East Dereham, Norfolk, Auctioneer. April 21.

Francis v Baker, Chitty, J. Cooper, East Dereham Goes, Ciaea EBswBLL^Margate. April 21. Starkey v The Governors of Queen Anne's

Bounty, Hall. V.C. Houghtons and Byfleld, Gracechurch st Hope, Thomas, Gt Longstono, Derby, Wheelwright. April 29. Woodhouse v Hope,

Hall, V.C. Stone, Wirksworth King, Bebnabd, Richmond rd, Barnsbury, Boot Manufacturer. April 29. King V King,

Chitty, J. May, Bishopsgate st "Without Torkinqton, Osgood, Holly lodge, Clapham park, Esq. April 21. Smith v Williams,

Hall, V.C. Boyle, Mecklenburgh sq

[Gazette, Mar. 21.]

Buby, Riohabd Leb, New Haw, Addlestone, Chertsey. April 25. Madeley v Bury,

Chitty, J. Trinder, St Helen's place Faulxnbb, Isaac, Manchester, Gent. May 1. Gardiner v Faulkner, Hall, V.C.

Broome, Staple inn

Halleb, William, Cliffe-cum-Lund, York, Farmer. April 24. Haller v Haller, Chitty, J. Young, York

Hickman, Shadbach, Oaken, Stafford, Fanner. April 25. Fisher v Hartill, Fry, J.

Neve, Wolverhampton Moppatt, James Romulus, Mirfleld, York, Maltster. April 25. Moffatt v Moffatt, Fry,

J. Rhodes, Halifax

Pulton, Haeriet, Witchampton, Dorset. April 22. Lake v Warren, Chitty, J. Smith, Blandford Forum, Dorset

[Gazette, Mar. 28.J

CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. CAP. 35.
LAST DAY OF CLAIM.
Applbton, John, Crosby sq, Gent. Apr 17. Oxley, Crosby sq

Aekbll, John, Stratton St Margaret, Wilts, Brewer. May 6. Kinncir and Tombs,
Swindon

Ballbbas, Guilleemo Estebait, Carlton rd, Maida Vale, Merchant. May 1. Thomson and Co, Comhill

Battyb, Wynyabd, Weybridge, Surrey, Retired Major. May 1. Nisbet and Daw, Lincoln's-inn-fields

Boycb, Alpbed Geoege, Eastmeon, Southampton, Saddler. May 25. Albery and

Lucas, Midhurst, Sussex Bboad, Jambs Cottle, Upper st, Islington, Builder. May 1. Mason, Chancery lano Brown, Martin, Tynemouth, Farmer, June 1. Lietoh and Co, North Shields Bbunskill, William, St Helen's, Lancaster, Registrar of Births. Apr 10. Barrow and

Cook, St Helen's

CAS8AN, Thomas, Lowisham High rd, Captain. Apr 24. Tompson and Co, Lincoln's inn

Clark, John, Comberbach, Chester, Gent. Apr 30. Fletcher, Northwich
Clare, Sarah Elizabrth, Hartley, Southampton. May 15. (Lamb and Brooks, Odiham
Crockeb, Geobgb, Faversham, Kent, Sailmaker. Apr 11. Tassell and Son, Faversham
Ceopt, Henby, Heysham, Lancaster. June 21. Whitaker, Lancaster pi, Strand
Drake. Sir William Henby, Clanricarde gardens, Bayswater, K.C.B. May 1. Flux

and Co, East India avenue Eccles, Fbancbs Coaies, Lansdowne crescent,Kensington park. April 28. Tidswcll,

Manchester

Ex All, William, Reading, Engineer. June 1. Andrewes, Gresham bldgs
Fabmeb, William, Nottingham, Hotel Proprietor. May 8. Barlow, Nottingham
Fey, John, Clapton pk, Gent. April 24. Marling, Fetter lane, Fleet st
George, David, Cheltenham, Confectioner, and Charlotte Geoege. June 1. Griffiths,

Cheltenham

Gilmoub, John, Sandringham gardens, Ealing. May 10. Gresham and Davies, Baaingliall st

Geieeson, Habbiet Dorothea. Daniill, Great Yarmouth. May 1. Nisbet and Daw, Lincoln's-inn-flolds

Hall, Charles, Tolleshunt Knights, Essex, Farmer. May 8. Turner and Co, Colchester

Hanbuby, Daniel Bell, Hollywood, Clapham common, Esq, May 1. Flux and Co, East India avonuo

Head, Geoege, Newgate Market, Licensed Victualler. Apr 26. Nowbon and Co,

Wardrobe pi, Doctors' commons Heebert, John, Church st, Fulham, Licensed Victualler. May 1. Nicholls, Lincoln's

inn fields

Hodson, John, Kirkbampton, Cumberland, Esq. April 8. Saul, Carlisle
Hutchings, John, Plymouth, Gent. April 16. Palmer, Doncaster
Knowlbs, Maby, Ashton-under-Lyne. Apr 25. Clayton, Ashton-under-Lyne
Knowles, Ralph, Ashton-under-Lyne, Gent. Apr 25. Clayton, Ashton-under-Lyne
Mangles, Sblina Theresa, Sunningdale, Berks. May 1. Young and Co, St Mildred's
ct. Poultry

Orb, Jamrb, Liverpool, Gent. Apr 12. Mason and Grierson, Liverpool
Pbaece, Charles, Hove, Sussex, Esq. June 30. Pearce, Abchurch yard
Porritt, Jonathan, Bradford, Wool Merchant. May 6. Gardiner and Jeffery, Bradford
Rice, Jesse, Bristol, Painter. May 1. Wise, Bristol
Scott, Jambs, Southend, Hotel Proprietor. Apr 29. Gregson, Southend
Snelgbove. Caeolinb Fbances, Donhead St Andrew, Wilts. Apr 15. Nodder and
Gator, Salisbury

Sutclippe, Geacb, Bradford. May 6. Gardiner and Jeffery, Bradford
Tennant, Charles, The Boltons, South Kensington. Apr 24. Hawkos and Co, Boro'
High st

Tbehebne, Henby, Ashperton, Hereford, Farmer. May 9. Masofleld and Sons,
Ledbury

Walkbb, Anit, Sheffield. Apr 27. Rodgers and Co, Sheffield

Webstbb, Richard, Queen victoria st, watchmaker. May 13. Simpson and Culling, ford, Gracechurch st

Welch, Elizabbta Coleman, East Stonehouso, Devon. June 26. Wilson, Plymouth Whitehill, Chables Stephen, Brighton, Colonel. Apr 29. Makinson and Carpenter, Devereux ct, Temple

Whittinqbam, Wuuav, Liverpool, Gent, May L Morecroft and Winstanley, Liver pool

[Gazette, Mar, H,

LEGISLATION OF THE WEEK.

HOUSE OF LORDS. March 30.— Hills Bead a Third Time. Private Bill?.—Bristol Water; London and St. Katharine's Docks.

Bill Read a Firit Time. Duke of Albany (Establishment).

March 31—Bills Read a First Time, Bills of Sale Act Amendment ; Union of Benefices Act Amendment.

Bill Read a Second Time. Duke of Albany (Establishment).

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
March 30.—Bill Read a Second Time.
Private Bill.—Feckham, East Dulwich, and Crystal Palace Tramways.

Bills Read a Third Time.
Private Bills.—Goldon Valley Railway; Nottingham Corporation.

Bill Read a First Time.
Bill to disfranchise, permanently or temporarily, on account of corrupt
practices, certain cities and boroughs, and to diequalify certain voters (The
Attorney-general).

March 31.—Bills Read a Second Time. Private Bills.—Forcett Railway (Extension); Lynn and Fakenham Railway; Thames Deep Water Dock Railway.

Bills Read a Third Time. Private Bills.—Alnwick Corporation; Welshpool knd Llanfair Railway (Abandonment); West Ham Local Board.

April 3.—Bills Read a Second Time. Private Bills.—Agricultural Company of Mauritius; Maidstone Water; West Metropolitan Tramways. Army (AnDual).

Bills Bead a Third Time. Private Bills.—Metropolitan Markets (Eish, &c.); Nortb-Esstem Railway (Alnwick and Cornhill Branch).

New Bills.

Bill to facilitate and regulate the supply of electricity for lighting and other pnropses in Great Britain and Ireland (Mr. Ashley).

Bill for consolidating the Acts relating to the Militia and the Acts relating to the Reserve Forces (Mr. 0. Morgan).

April 4.—Bills Read a Second Time.

Private Bills.—Cheadle Railway ; Newquay Water; Solway Junction Railway; Westgate and Birchington Gas.

[blocks in formation]

Stanford, Thomas, Sydenham, Kent, Grocer. Pet Mar 28. Pitt-Taylor. Greenwich, April 11 at 1

Tompson, John, Birmingham, Gent. Pet Mar 27. Parry. Birmingham, April 17 at 2

Tuisday, April 1, 1882. Under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. Creditors must forward their proofs of debts to the Registrar. To Surrender in London. Harnett, Phcsbe, Goldhawk rd, Hammersmith, Corn Dealer. Pet Mar 31. Murray. April 18 at 12.30

Pike, Boaz Joseph, Whitecross at, Cripplegate, Artificial Florist. Pet Mar 30. Hazliti. April 19 at 2

To Surrender in the Country. Brocklehurst, William, Preston, Draper. Pet Mar 31. Hulton. Preston, April 21 at 11 Cresswell, John Pearson, Wolverhampton, Surgeon. Pet April 3. Sanders. Wolver

hampton-April 17 at 12 Cuthbert, William James, Blackpool, Lancaster, Toy Dealer. Pet April I. Hulton.

Preston, April 21 at 11.30 Dewes, Henry, Nuneaton, Warwick, Solicitor. Pet Mar 30. Kirby. Coventry, April

25 at 2

Newall, Alice Ann, Cheadle, Chester, Draper. Pet Mar 30. Hyde. Stockport, April 17 at 11

BANKRUPTCIES ANNULLED.
Tussday, April 1, 1882.
Gray, Philip Edward, Cambridge, Innkeeper. Mar 22.

Liquidations by Arrangement.

FIRST MEETINGS OF CREDITORS. Friday, March 31, 1882. Backett, Isaac, Angell rd, Brixton, Accountant. Apr 17 at 2 at office of Norris and Norris, Bedford row

Bagnall, Ephraim, Eccleshall, Machine Proprietor. Apr 11 at 11.30 at Vine Hotel,

Stafford. Tennant and Co, Hanley Bain bridge, Walter, Grantham, Draper. Apr 12 at 12 at office of Schofield, St Peter's

hill, Grantham

Baker, William, Towcester, Northampton, Shoe Manufacturer. Apr 11 at 11 at Angel

Hotel, Northampton. Whitton, Towcester Banks, Samuel, Featherstone, York, Shopkeeper. Apr 13 at 3 at offices of Horner and

Edmondson, Wood at, Wakefield Barnes, Thomas, Tilehurst, Berks, out of business. Apr 11 at 3 at 18, the Forbury,

Reading. Creed

Barnett, Dawson, Finebury pavement, Umbrella Manufacturer. Apr 12 at 3 at office of Goldring, White Lion st, Norton Folgate

Belcher, James, Reading, Builder. Apr 17 at 11 at offices of Newman, Friar st, Reading

Bianchi, Francis, and Robert Marwell Fabris, Gresham st, Wholesale Ironmongers. Apr 18 at 3 at Guildhall Tavern, Gresham st. WiUrins and Fanshawe, Founders' Hall,

St Swithin'e lane

Bradahaw, Nicholas, Accrington, Draper. Apr 13 at 3 at Peel's Arms Hotel, Whalley

rd, Accrington. Whalley, Accrington Briggs, William Alexander, Salford, Licensed Victualler. Apr 21 at 3 at offices of

Smythe and Sykes, King st, Manchester Brown, Samuel George, High st, Shadwell, Plumber. Apr 19 at 2 at office of Wood

leigh, Guildhall chmbrs, Basinghall st. Hewitt, Nicholas lane Brown, William, Shrewabury, Salop, Coal Merchant. Apr 11 at 11 at office of Morris,

Swan Hill, Shrewsbury Brown, William Frederick, Northampton, Baker. Apr 13 at 11 at office of Andrew,

Market sq, Northampton Bryant, William, Bristol, Butcher. Apr 13 at 12 at office of Clifton and Carter, Broad

st, Bristol

Buckley, John, and George Buckley, Hockley, Warwick, Spoon and Fork Makers.

Apr 17 at 11 at 67, Colmore row, Birmingham. Bayley Clark, John, Longtown, Cumberland, Watch Maker. Apr 17 at 3 at office of Errington;

Bonk st, Carlisle

Collins, George, Greet, Worcester, Accountant's Clerk. Apr 11 at 12 at office of Jelf,

Waterloo st, Birmingham Collins, John, Birmingham, Wholesale Grocer. Apr 13 at 3 at office of Wright and

Marshall, New st, Birmingham Coutts, William George, Pershore, Worcester, Painter. Apr 13 at 11 at office of Pace,

Bridge st, Pershore

Criohton, James, Commercial Sale Room, Mincing lane, Merchant. Apr 21 at 3 at office of Cooper and Co, George st, Mansion House HolUuns and Co, Mincing lane

Dickerson, Charles, sen, Weldegrave rd, Turnpike rd, Hornsey. Apr 8 at 11 at office of Hawkins, North bldgs, Eldon st, Finsbury

Dickin, John, Birmingham, Window Blind Maker. Apr 13 at 3 at office of Southall, Waterloo st, Birmingham

Dunn, Edward Thomas, Bouverie st, Fleet st, Varnish Manufacturer. Apr 17 at 3 at office of Dyte and Stead, Chancery lane. Venn and Woodcock, New inn. Strand

Durling, George, Chatham, Grocer. Apr 13 at 3 at King's Head Hotel, High st, Rochester. Shakespear, Chatham

Emmerson, Alexander George, Kew Bridge rd, Brentford, Sailmaker. Apr 21 at 3 at office of Incorporated Law Society, Chancery lane. Woodbridge and Sons, Brentford

Everitt, Henry, Ardleigh, Essex, Farmer. Apr 11 at 11 at office of Pope and Co, Trinity st, Colchester. Marshall, Colchester

Evison, John, Falsgrave, Scarborough, York, Grocer. Apr 11 at 11 at Bell Hotel, Driffield. Appleyard, Scarborough

Fairman, Francis, Bletchingly, Surrey, Farmer. Apr 18 at 3 at office of Morrison, High st, Reigate

Farr, Edward Robinson, Nottingham, Provision Merchant. Apr 11 at 2 at Assembly rooms, Low pavement, Nottingham. Martin and Son, Nottingham

Fenton, James, and John Long, Deptford Bridge, Kent, Coat and Coke MerchantsApr 21 at 3 at Tudor House, 120, Greenwich rood. Miller and Co, Greenwich

rindon, John, Cannock, Stafford, Grocer. Apr 11 at 11 at the Bridge, Walsall. Loxton, Walsall

Fisher, Walter, Bristol, Printer. Apr 12 at 2 at offices of Cumberland, Clare st, Bristol

Fisher, Walter, Filey, York, Photographer. Apr 12 at 3 at offices of Watta and

Kitching, Queen st, Scarborough Flanagan, William, Oldham, Greengrocer. Apr 13 at 3 at offices of Simpson and

Hockin, Mount st, Albert sq, Manchester Flexman, David, Great Beddow, Essex, Farmer. Apr 11 at 11 at offices of Meggy,

Duke st, Chelmsford

Gregory, John Moss, Rosslyn hill, Hampstcad, Watchmaker. Apr 13 at 3 at offices of Dear, Gresham st

Hancox, Thomas, and William Hancox, King's heath, Builders. Apr 11 at 11 at offices

of Thomas, Waterloo st, Birmingham Haward, Horace, Portland rd, Wholesale Grocer. Apr 13 at 12 at offices of Creditors'

Association of Wholesale Grocers, Arthur st, East, Godfrey, Chancery lane Hawkins, Henry, Old Kent rd, Camberwell, Baker. Apr 18 at 3 at Masons' Hall tavern,

Masons' avenue. Fowler and Co, Borough High st, Southwark Hertzog, Alfred, Salford, Lancaster, Clowes Dealer. Apr 19 at 3 at offices of Sims,

Market place, Manchester Higham, Maria, Barrow in Furness, Draper. Apr 11 at 11 at tho Imperial Hotel, Corn

wallis st, Barrow in Furness. Naider and Jones, Barrow in Furness Holgate, Octayiasj Ipswich, Baker, Apr 19 at 2 at No, 7, St, Lawrence et, Ipswich.

Pollard

« PreviousContinue »