« PreviousContinue »
Silversides, Frederick, Leamington Priors, Warwick, American Meat Salesman. May Hancos, Thomas, Ryton-on-Dunsmore, Warwick, Licensed Victualler. May 13 at 11 at 12 at 11 at 19, High st, Warwick. Boddington, Warwick
offices of Hughes and Masser, Little Park st, Coventry Şimmons, William, Birmingham, Provision Dealer. May 9 at 3 at office of Jaques, Hanger, Alfred Feary, Oxford, Boot Dealer. May i7 at 12 at New Inq, Oxford. Temple row, Birmingham
Galpin, Oxford Smith, Charles Arthur, Croydon, Stationer. May 18 at 3 at Masons' Hall Tavern, Harding, Needham, and William Isaac Jackson, Birmingham, General Factors. May Masons' avenue, Basinghall st. Kilvington and Stock, Walbrook
16 at 2.30 at offices of Dale and Vachell, Bennett's hill, Birmingham Stead, Saul, Leeds, Grocer. May 11 at 11 at the Law Institute, Albion st, Leedş. Cross, Hardy, George William, Birmingham, Refreshment House Keeper. "May 17 at 1.30 at Bradford
offices of Bass and Co, limd, Newhall st, Birmingham. Jennings and Co, Burton-on, Stockdale, William, Lancaster, Innkeeper. May 11 at 12 at Queen's Hotel, Penny st.
Trent Fryer, Preston
Hart, George, Wakefield, York, Clerk of Works. May 15 at 3 at offices of Harrison and Styles, Augustine, Leicester, Brewer. May 10 at 3 at Bell Hotel, Leicester. Stone and Beaumont, Chancery lane, Wakefield Co, Leicester
Hewer, John, Bridford, Devon, Farmer. May 12 at 11 at offices of Friend, Post Office Swift, Samuel, Southwell, Nottingham, Butcher. May 12 at 3 at office of Kirkland, chmbrs, Exeter Southwell
Hewitt, Louis William, Stretton-on-Dunsmore, Warwick, of no occupation. May 15 at Taylor, Thomas, Saffron Walden, Essex, Ironmonger. May 15 at 11 at the Tạns of Higham, John Frederick, Hulme, Manchester, Musical Instrument Dealer. May 18 at Thompson, Henry Charles, Mincing lane, Colonial Broker. May 19 at 2 at offices of
12 at offices of Pritchard and Co, Painters' Hall, Little Trinity lane, London. Hinde Fuller and Wise, Gresham st. Harwood and Stephenson, Lombard st
and Co, Manchester Wallace, William Henry, Huddersfield, Grocer. May 10 at 12 at offices of Sykes,
Hodge, John Samuel, South Molton, Devon, Tailor, May 12 at 12 at offices of Riccard, Markét st, Huddersfield
South Molton Ward, Joseph, Blackley, near Manchester, General Dealer. May 18 at 2 at the Mitre Hopkins, John, Walbrook, Solicitor. May 10 at 3 at Masons' Tavern, Masons' avenue, Hotel, Cathedral yard, Manchester. Leigh, Manchester
Basinghall st. McLachlan, Croydon Werrett, Nathaniel, Walworth rd, Hat Manufacturer. May 11 at 11 at offices of Chalk, Howson,
Richard Gregory, Clapham cum Newby, York, Joiner. May 16 at 1 at Flying
Merchant. May 12 at 2 at offices of Lousada White, George, Beeston, Nottingham, Boot Dealer. May 12 at 3 at offices of Stroud, Hurst, Edwin Henry, New London st, se Low pavement, Nottingham
and Emanuel, Austinfriars White, Robert, and Thomas Joseph Nye, New Brompton, Kent, Builders. May 15 at 2
Ireton, Arthur John, and Joseph Kilsby Ward, Piazza, Covent Garden, Potato Salesat 126, High st, Chatham. Norman, Chatham
men. May 25 at 12 at Ashley's Covent Garden Hotel, Henrietta st, Covent Garden, Wigg, Harris, East Grinstead, Sussex, Tea Dealer. May 15 at 3 at offices of Cripps, James, Thomas, Much Wenlock, Salop, Grocer. May 16 at 12.30 at Raven Hotel, Much
Button and Co, Henrietta st, Covent Garden
Wenlock, Phillips and Co, Shifnal
Jeffery, Henry, Cheltenham, Hotel Keeper. May 12 at 11 at Belle Vue Hotel, Chelten. Williams, Charles, Rushmere, near Ipswich, Suffolk, Farmer. May 22 at 2 at offices of
ham, Winterbotham and Co, Cheltenham Westhorp, Museum st, Ipswich
Jennings, Samuel, Bradford, Innkeeper. May 12 at 11 at offices of Greaves and Taylor, Williams, Thomas, Dowlais, Glamorgan, Grocer. May 9 at 12 at offices of Lewis, Glebe
Cheapside, Bradford land st, Merthyr Tydfil
Jewkes, James, Dudley, Worcester, Straw Dealer. May 12 at 12 at offices of Tinsley, Wilson, John Bartholomew, Bethnal Green rd, Boot Manufacturer. May 8 at 2 at offices
Priory st, Dudley of Tripp, Catherine st, Strand
Johnstone, Hannah, Bishop Auckland, Durham, Grocer. May 20 at 11 at offices of Woods, Albert, Warrington, Lancaster, Provision Merchant. May 16 at 3 at offices of
Stillman, North Bondgate, Bishop Auckland Davies and Co, Market pl, Warrington
Jones, George, Shrewsbury, Baker. May 17 at 11 at St John's Hill, Shrewsbury. Wortman, Mark Gabriel, and Morris Michaelson, Strand, Tailors. May 11 at 3 at offices
Nutsey of Willis, St Martin's ct, Leicester sq.
Jones, John, Sedgley, Blacksmith. May 15 at 11 at office of Whitehouse, Dudley rd, Wrathall, John, Barrow-in-Furness, Boot Manufacturer. May 12 at 2 at offices of
Tipton Hayes and Co, Britannia bldgs, Oxford pl, Leeds. Garnett, Barrow-in-Furness
Knightsbridge, James, Provost st, Hoxton, Draper, May 9 at 3 at offices of Staniland, Wright, William George, Sheffield, Grocer. May 11 at 2 at the Law Society, Hoole's
Queen st, Cheapside chmbrs, Bank st, Sheffield. Hickmott
Koppel, Bernard, Commercial rd East, Dealer in Boots. May 11 at 2 at Masons' Hall
Tavern, Masons' avenue, Basinghall st. Waring, Gresham bldgs, Guildhall
Langley, Thomas, Wellington, Salop, out of business. May I at 11 at office of Car. TUESDAY, May 2, 1882.
rane, Wellington Allport, Samuel, Sedgley, Stafford, out of business. May 17 at 3 at offices of Stoke
Lee, John Edward, Manchester, Iron Worker. May 18 at 3 at office of Rylance, Essex and Hooper, Priory st, Dudley
st, Manchester Ashmore, Charles Townsend, Fowkes bldgs, Great Tower st, Merchant. May 23 at 2 at
Lewis, Alfred Elias, North Malvern, Worcester, Builder, May 12 at 2.30 at Hop offices of Flux and Co, East India avenue
Market Hotel, Worcester. Bowers, Great Malvern Ayre, Charles, Fairfield, near Liverpool, Plumber. May 10 at 3 at offices of Quilliam, Lucas, John George, Worthing, Sussex, Draper. May 16 at 3 Serjeant's inn, Fleet st. Whitechapel, Liverpool. Riley, Liverpool
Nye, Brighton Bangh, Sarah, Richmond rd, Dalston. May 0 at 3 at offices of Paulin, Fen court, Fen. Lupinsky, Abraham, Shoreditch, Tailor. May 18 at 3 at John st, Bedford row. Browne Bennet, Charles, Dedham, Essex, Grocer. May 12 at 3 at offices of Goody, North hill, Makin, James Brierley, Rotherham, York, Boot and Shoe Dealer. May 12 at 3 at Bennett, Robert, and James Bennett, Strangeways, Manchester, Watch Makers. May Marshall, Thomas, Bristol, Baker.' May 13 at 11 at office of Evans, Exchange bldgs
17 at 2 at offices of Horner, Clarence st, Manchester Benson, John, Westerdale Mill, near Yarn, York, Miller. May 15 at 11 at offices of
Martin, John, Sheffield, Engraver. May 16 at 2 at ofices of Taylor, Norfolk row,
Sheffield Chilton, Mechanics' Institute, Dovecot st, Stockton-on-Tees Boges, Robert, Bradford, Painter. May 12 at 11 at offices of Peel and Co, Chapel lane, Martin, John, Osborne rd, Hackney Wick, Baker., May 10 at 11 at Unicorn Tavern, Bradbury, Joseph, and Hervey Bradbury, Batley, York, Woollen Manufacturers. May Micklewright, Francis William, Hastings, Watchmaker. May 16 at 12 at the Guildhall Bradley, George Bristow, Fakenham, Worcester, Builder. May 17 at 12 at offices of Miroy, Ernest Leon, Queen Victoria st, Clock and Bronze Manufacturer. May 23 at 3 at Corbett, Avenue House, the Cross, Worcester.' Blick, Droitwich
Cannon st Hotel, Cannon st. Morris, Walbrook Burrington, Alfred Bragg, Shaftesbury ra, Hammersmith, Professor of Music. May 15 Morris, William, Worcester, Dispensing Chemist. May 12 at 12 at office of Goldingham, Briggs, John, Brighton. May 22 at 12 at offices of Edmonds and Co, Cheapside. Cooper Morse, Charles, Norwich, Clerk in Holy Orders. May 15 at 12 at office of Stanley, Bank
and Williams, Brighton Brown, John, jún, and James Brown, Upper Thames st, Iron and Marble Merchants.
Moulder, Elijah, Naunton, Gloucester, Fa r. May at 11 at office of Clark, Regent May 11 at 3 at offices of Edmunds and Co, Cheapside. Wells, Paternoster row
st, Cheltenham Brunsden, Charles, Gorse Hill, Stratton, wilts, out of business. May 11 at 3 at offices Neighbour, Alfred Edmund, Medmenham, Bucks, Innkeeper, May 13 at 3 at the Red of Boodle, Albion st, New Swindon, Wilts
Lion Inn, Gt Marlow. Batting, Gt Marlow Burkinshaw, Matthew, Hanley, Stafford, Joiners' Tool Dealer. May 15 at 11 at offices Newman, Robert, Worcester, Grocer. May 23 at 12 at office of Corbett, Avenue House,
the Cross, Worcester Bushill, John, Wolston, near Coventry, Builder. May 11 at 2 at 17, Little Park st, Normansen. Thomas, West Bromwich, Stafford, Contractor. May 12 at 11 at office of Coventry. Homer, Coventry
Stokes, Temple st, Birmingham Cannings, John, Birmingham, Leather Seller. May 11 at 3 at offices of East, Temple st,
Parry, Richard, Craig Llanfair, Anglesey, Farmer. May 15 at 1.30 at Glandwr Llangefni,
Anglesey. Owen, Bangor Birmingham
Peacock, John Samuel, Worcester, Schoolmaster. May 19 at 12 at office of Corbett, Carter, Henry Denter, Leamington, Tailor. May 12 at 2.30 at offices of Parr and Hayes, Avenue House, the Cross, Worcester Colmore row, Birmingham
Pitcher, Douglas, Brighton, Wine Merchant. May 15 at 3 at 145, Cheapside. Goode Christmas, Fred, Marchi, Cambridge, Carpenter. May 11 at 11 at offices of Sidney and man, North st, Brighton
Pitt, William, Wolverhampton, Grocer. May 18 at 11.30 at offices of Whitehouse,
Queen st, Wolverhampton Hotel, Coventry. Tomlinson, Newport
Plint, Thomas Edward, Leeds, Stationer's Clerk. May 15 at 3 at offices of Saville, Cole, Abraham, Bristol, out of business. May 10 at 12 at offices of Essery, Nicholas st, East parade, Leeds Bristol
Preston, George Henry, Sheffield. May 17 at 2 at offices of Taylor, Norfolk row, Comer, Thomas Worts, Huddersfield. Omnihus Proprietor. May 17 at 3 at Law Society, Sheffield
Protheroe, Francis Richard Henry, Bristol, Brick Manufacturer. May 11 at 11 at office Coombe, George, Bristol, Glass and China Dealer. May 11 at 2 at offices of Sibly and of Nicholas, Corn st, Bristol Dickinson, Exchange West, Bristol
Purchase, Edward, Bridge rd, Cowkeeper. May 16 at 2 at offices of Hamlin and Cooper, Thomas, Maidstone, Clothier. May 13 at 11 at Cannon st, Hotel, Cannon st. Grammer, Staple inn, Holborn Stenning, Maidstone
Rich, James Crocker, Russell st, Leather Seller. May 17 at 2 at offices of Marshall, Dallaway, Joseph, Devizes, out of business. May 13 at 11 at offices of Smith, High st, Chancery lane Devizes
Roberts, William, Sheffield, Grocer. May 15 at 3 at offices of Smith and Co, Meeting. Draper, William, Warwick, Boot and Shoe Dealer. May 15 at 11 at offices of Sanderson, house lane, Sheffield Church at, Warwick
Rogers, John, White Lion st, Chelsea, Ironmonger. May 12 at 3 at Inns of Court Hotel, Dunn, Walter, Oxford st, General Store Proprietor. May 24 at 2 at Guildhall Tavern, Holborn. Harrison, Pancras lane Gresham st. Van Sandau and Co, King st, Chepside
Russell, Thomas, Taunton, Somerset, Retired Tailor, May 22 at 11 at offices of Kite, Evans, Alfred Palmer, Batheaston, Somerset, Clerk in Holy Orders. May 12 at 11 at East st, Taunton 0, Old Bond st, Bath. How
Seller, Michael Henry, Strand, Bag Manufacturer, May 22 at at 111, Cheapside. Evans, Morgan, Llanychairn, Cardigan, Grocer. May 11 at 11 at offices of Griffith Reed and Co, Guildhall chmbrs, Basinghall st Jones and Co, Great Darkgate st, Aberystwith
Shenton, James, Wharton, Chester, Farmer. May 13 at 11 at offices of Green and Garner, John, Spurstow, Chester, Grocer. May 11 at 12.30 at Royal Hotel, Crewe. Dixon, High st, Winsford Walker and Co, Chester
Simpson, Charles, Chichester, Sussex, Fishmonger. May 19 at 12 at offices of Edmonds Gibson, Moses Westmoreland, Lincoln, Joiner. May 10 at 11 at offices of Page, Flaxen. and Co, Cheapside. Janman, Chichesier gate, Lincoln
Simpson, John Tidd, Newland, York, Commission Agent. May 11 at 3 at offices of Gratton, John, Fegg Hayes, near Turstall, Stafford, Grocer. May 17 at 3 at offices of Gregson, Exchange bldgs, Bowlalley lane, Kingston-upon-Hull. Thorp, Kingston. Llewellyn and Ackrill, Piccadilly, Tunstali
upon-Hull Gray, Henry, Seavington St Mary, Somerset, Farm Bailiff. May 21 at 11 at offices of Smith, Jonathan, Tonbridge, Kent, Corn Dealer. May 19 at 12 at offices of Stenning, Paull, Court Barton, Ilminster
High st, Tonbridge Greenwood, William Watson, Bradford, Stuff Manufacturer. May 13 at 10 at 12, Smith, Roger Bickerton, Wellington Stables Farm, Northumberland, Farmer. May 12 Piccadilly, Bradford. Berry and Robinson, Bradford
at 12 at offices of Rhagg, Grainger st, Newcastle-upon-Tyne Grimmer, Frederic Arthur, Norwich, Corn Merchant. May 9 at 12 at offices of Stanley, Smith, William Wigley, Grundy st, Poplar, Furniture Dealer. May 16 at 12 at offices of Bank pí, Norwich
Plunkett and Leader, St Paul's churchyard
Stacey, Robert, York rd, Islington, Tobacconist. May 15 at 3 at offices of Medcalfe,
CURRENT TOPICS....................... 411
SOLICITORS' CASES.................... 418 Steele, John, Tunstall, Stafford, Hairdresser. May 17 at 3 at offices of Salt and Alcock, A WAY OUT OF THE MORTMAIN ACT.... 412 NEW ORDERS, &c. .................... 418 Market st, Tunstall
LIQUIDATION VERSUS BANKRUPTCY.... 414
..................... 420 Summers, Frederick, Durant st, Bethnal Green, Builder. May 17 at 3 at offices of REVIEWS....
420 Willis, Charles sq, Hoxton
421 Tewson, Frederick William, Bungay, Suffolk, Auctioneer. May 15 at 2 at King's Head CASES OF THE WEEK
LEGAL APPOINTMENTS ................ 422 Hotel, Bungay. Bavin and Caynes, Norwich
Williams v. Preston ................ 416 COMPANIES
422 Thompson, Thomas, Morecambe, Lancaster. Boot Maker. May 15 at 2 at office of Harris v. Fleming
LEGISLATION OF THE WEEK .......... 422 Johnson and Tilly, Sun st, Lancaster
In re Angove ...................... 417 Court PAPERS
................ 423 Trott, John, Inwardleigh, Devon, Shoemaker. May 15 at 3.30 at White Hart Hotel, In re Biaggi
117 CREDITORS' CLAIMS .................. 423 Okehampton. Petherick, Exeter
Broadbent v. Barrow
..................... 423 Wetherell, Mary Ann, Scarborough, Lodging House Keeper. May 13 at 12 at office of Glen v. Gregg .................... 418 LEGAL NEWS
.......... 423 Watts and Kitobing, Queen st, Scarborough
Jameson v. Maskell ................. 418 LONDON GAZETTES, &c., &C........... 423 Wickham, Henry, Liverpool, Linen Draper. May 16 at 3 at office of Lupton, Sweeting
NOTICES TO CORRESPONDENTS.-All communications intended for publication Wilson, Thomas Temple, Scarborough, Market Clerk. May 12 at 3 at office of Watts
in the SOLICITORS' JOURNAL must bs authenticated by the name and address of and Kitching, Queen st, Scarborough
the writer. Wood, William, stourbridge, Provision Dealer. May 16 at 11 at offices of Collis, Union chbrs, Stourbridge
The Publisher requests that early application should be made by persons Woodhouse, Albert, Rowley Regis, Stafford, Nail Manufacturer. May 16 at 11 at office
desirous of obtaining back numbers of the SOLICITORS' JOURNAL, as only a small of Wright, High st, Cradley Heath
number of copies remain on hand.
HEWETSON, THEXTON, & PEART,
EDE AND SON,
. MAKERS with the excess of fat extracted. The Faculty pronounce it “the most nutritious, per
MANUFACTURERS AND HOUSE FURNISHERS, fectly digestible beverage for Breakfast, Luncheon, or 200, 203, and 204, TOTTENHAM COURT ROAD, W.
BY SPECIAL APPOINTMENT, Supper, and invaluable for Invalids and Children.”
Estimates and Designs submitted free for entirely Fur. Highly commended by the entire Medical Press. nishing Residences, Chambers, Offices, &c.
To Her Majesty, the Lord Chancellor, the Whole of the Being without sugar, spice, or other admixture, it suits -PAINTING, DECORATING, & HOUSE REPAIRS.
Judicial Bench, Corporation of London, &c. all palates, keeps better in al climates, and is four times he strength of cocoas THICKENED yet wBAKENED with
SOLICITORS' AND REGISTRARS' GOWNS. starch, &c., and IN REALITY CHEAPER than such Mixtures. Carved Oak Furniture, Reproductions from Ancient
BARRISTERB’ AND QUEEN'S COUNBBL'S DITTO, 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.
CORPORATION ROBES, UNIVERSITY ? CLERGY GOWNS, COCOATINA A LA VANILLE is the most delicate, digestible,
THIRTY LARGE SHOW ROOMS. cheapest Manilla Chocolate, and may be taken when
ESTABLISHED 1889. richer chocolate is prohibited. In tin packets at 1s. 6d., 38., 5s, 6d., &c., by Chemists
HEWETSON, THEXTON, & PEART,
94, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON. and Grocers.
200, 203, and 204, Tottenham Court-rood, London, W. Charities on Special Terms by the Sole Proprietors,
N.B.-Household Furniture Warehoused or Removed H. SCHWEITZER & CO 10, Adam-street, London, W.C. on reasonable terms.
C. H. GRIFFITHS & SONS,
SIX GUINEA LEGAL NEST lane, immediately opposite the Chancery-lane Post-office. STEPHENS' SCARLET INK FOR STEEL PENS,
SHOULD BE USED BY ALL SOLICITORS, This new Ink supplies the demand continually made but Loyales Alexander e Shepheard, n, Chancery.lang. It is the most convenient and durable
set offered to the never before met, for a Red Ink which is uninjured by
Profession, Steel or other Metallic Pens. Steel Pens left in this ink for months do not impair the beauty of its colour, nor are
, the Pens in the least corroded by it. The existing Red
Conditions of Sale, Posters, &c., printed by Yates,
Alexander & Shepheard. Inks rapidly destroy Steel Pens, and lose their red colour colour of love, rich scarlet red of great beauty, The PAMPHLETS, Books, Newspapers, Circu
by and is consequently of great value to Solicitors and
Yates Alexander & Shepheard. Draughtsmen.
ROSPECTUSES of Public Companies, quarts of 40 ounces at 68. each. Also in glass bottles at 6d, and ls. each.
ficates, Receipts Notices, &c., printed by Yates Alexander
& Shepheard, 27, Chancery-lane.
Alexander & Shepheard, Lonsdale Buildings, 27.
AUTHORITY. Chancery-lane. The Companies Acts, 1862 to 1880.
davits, Petitions, and Pleadings printed by Yates Every requisite under the above Acts supplied on the
Alexander & Shepheard. shortest notice.
MEMORANDA and ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION
and YORK and GAME
SSENCE OF BEEF, BEEF TEA,
CAUTION :-BEWARE OF IMITATIONS,
1, LITTLE STANHOPE STREET, MAYFAIR,
and Mellow, Delicious and very Wholesome. DINNEFORD'S MAGNESIA.
proved of this pure solution as the bes remedy for Consists of four superior Japanned Deed Boxes, with The Cream of Old Irish Whiskies.
ACIDITY of the STOMACH, HEARTBURN, HEADACHE, fall-down fronts, and four compartments in each. Secured
by Hobbs's Patent or other Locks. Size 20in, by 13in, by
14in. K INAHAN'S LL WHISKY. Gold Medal, And as the safest Aperient for Delicate Constitutions, N.B.—The price quoted above will not admit cf any Paris Exhibition, 1878; Dublin Exhibition, 1865,
Ladies, Children, and Infan
discount to Stationers or others. the Gold Medal.
Mounted on an elegant iron stand with brass mountings. Great Titchfield-street, London, W.
DINNEFORD'S MAGNESIA. 0. H, GRIFFITHS & SONS, 43, Cannon-street, E.C.
-----5FT. 6 IN
The Solicitors' Journal.
LONDON, MAY 13, 1882.
taken to mean that the whole costs of the preparation, CURRENT TOPICS.
attestation, and execution of the bill of sale may be retained out of the consideration
But in the recent
case of Ex parte Firth, In re Cowburn (30 W. R. 529), IT IS UNDERSTOOD that Mr. Justice Fry will go on circuit at the Court of Appeal held that there is no debt for costs until the summer assizes, and that Mr. Justice Kay will remain in after the transaction has been completed; hence, as on the printown.
ciple of Ex parte Rolph (30 W. R. 52), a debt not yet due cannot
be deducted from the sum stated as the consideration, the costs of IT IS ANTICIPATED that a transfer of causes to Mr. Justice attestation and execution of the bill of sale cannot be deducted. Kay from the lists of two or more of the other judges of the The Master of the Rolls said that the circumstance that costs were
not actually a debt until after the transaction was complete was Chancery Division will shortly be made.
not present to the mind of Lord Justice JAMES, when he made the
observation above quoted. It must be borne in mind in future LORD COLERIDGE will sit with the Court of Appeal at Lincoln's- of the borrower, by his direction, can be deducted from the sum
that only money paid by the lender to satisfy the existing debts inn on Monday next, to continue the hearing of a part-heard case stated as the consideration; and that the costs of preparation and with witnesses. The Master of the Rolls will sit on that day with execution of a bill of sale are not an existing debt. the Westminster Division of the court.
WITH REFERENCE to our statement last week as to the increase
SIR HARDINGE GIFFARD's Bill to amend the Judicature Acts, so of business in the Chancery Division, we find that, while the five as to render it necessary that the rules made by the Rule Comjudges of first instance of that Division had, at the commencement mittee of Judges should be laid upon the table of the House for of the present sittings, 615 causes on their lists, and 246 causes forty days before coming into operation, will, we imagine, be very have been set down since, they have only disposed of 237 causes, generally welcomed by the profession. If there were no other leaving no fewer than 624 causes now on the books, a number reason for the proposal than to secure that practitioners should which is daily increasing.
have timely notice of rules effecting important changes in practice, this would be sufficient to justify the introduction of the Bill. The course which was at one time adopted of making rules to take
effect before printed copies could be obtained was in the highest A STATUTE which is little known, and which has for many degree inconvenient. Of late there has been some improvement years lain dormant, might, perhaps, be temporarily put in force in this respect, the Rules of the Supreme Court of April
, 1880, with a view of detecting crimes committed, if any, by Americans having been published three or four days before they came into in Ireland. We allude to the Act 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 11," for the registration of aliens,” to which we recently drew attention. By this to become acquainted with the effect of important changes in
operation. But this is quite insufficient to enable the profession statute every alien on arriving“ in any port of the United Kingdom practice ; and, moreover, the mode of publication is so inefficient from foreign parts must declare to the chief officer of Customs the that unless practitioners are wise enough to subscribe to a legal day and place of his landing, and his name, and also to what journal they are likely to remain in ignorance of the fact that such country he belongs. The declaration is to be reduced into writing changes have been made. It will be remembered that three by the officer, and a copy of it sent, in the case of arrivals in months after the Rules of April, 1880, were made, a learned Ireland, to the Chief Secretary for Ireland, the alien himself being Vice-Chancellor failed to recognize the existence of one of the furnished with a certificate which he is to deliver up to the chief rules specially relating to a class of actions among the most freofficer of Customs at the port of departure on leaving the country. quent in his branch of the High Court. But there are stronger The Passengers Act, 1855 (18 & 19 Vict. c. 119), contains a pro- reasons than the convenience of the profession for supporting Sir vision of still greater value for identification of strangers. By H. GIFFARD's Bill. The legislative powers confided to the Rule section 100 it is provided that the “master of every ship bringing Committee are too extensive to be exercised by any limited body, passengers into the United Kingdom from any place out of Europe however eminent, without an effective opportunity for a veto by shall, within twenty-four hours after arrival, deliver to an Parliament. There is a good deal of difference practically between “emigration officer” or his assistant, or in their absence to the vetoing rules not yet in operation, and rescinding rules which chief officer of Customs at the port of arrival, a correct list, signed have already come into operation. Sir HARDINGE GIFFARD'S by such master, specifying the names, ages, and callings of all the Bill is a return to the system in force in the Common Law Courts passengers embarked."
before the Judicature Acts, whereas the system in force in the Chancery Courts before that Act was similar to that adopted for
the whole Supreme Court by that Act. By 13 Vict. c. 16, and THERE IS NO SUBJECT on which the Court of Appeal has by section 233 of the Common Law Procedure Act, 1852, the “wobbled” more than on the question of what is a proper setting operation of new Rules of Court was suspended until Parliament forth of the consideration in a bill of sale. In Ex parte Challinor, had approved of them, while by the Chancery Amendment Act, In re Rogers (29 W. R. 205, L. R. 16 Ch. D. 260), Lord Justice 1858, s. 12, and the Chancery Amendment Act, 1862, s. 2, Rules JAMES said, “ It appears to me quite right to
duct the costs of of Court came into force as soon as made, subject to the power of preparing the bill of sale and the auctioneer's charges, for that is Parliament to annul them afterwards. what happens in every mortgage transaction.” And Lord Justice COTTON said that “ £40 was retained
for costs partly due on other transactions, and the rest for preparing the bill of IT HAS ALWAYS STRUCK US as strange that the compilers of sale by the solicitor, who also happened to be the lender. There precedent books should have bestowed so little attention on forms is no more difficulty in treating this money as paid to the borrower of leases to companies or trustees for companies. The preparation than if it had been handed to him and then applied by him in of these constitutes an important and responsible part of the busipaying those costs." These observations have been naturallyness of a conveyancer, yet there are very few forms of such leases
to be found in the books, and some of those which are provided charged against the corporation was a neglect to use the preare imperfect. For instance, there are forms which omit to pro- scribed formalities; and Lopes, J., concurred on the same ground. vide in the proviso for re-entry for the event of the winding up of The court also proceeded on the undoubtedly strong authority of the company, and in others the provision relating to this subject Reg. v. Prest (16 Q. B. 32), in which the judicial discretion given is inaccurately framed. Mr. DAVIDSON (vol. 5, pt. 1, p. 371) by the section was applied to protect the disputed order for the words his proviso in case “the lessees shall commence to be wound payment of an allowance to a town clerk over and above his stipuup under any Act or Acts of Parliament,” &c. This is right as lated salary, and not legally enforceable. We understand that the regards voluntary winding up, which is to be deemed to commence judgment will be appealed against, and there is no doubt, apart at the time of the passing of the resolution authorizing such from the merits of the particular case, much to be said against it. winding up (Companies Act, 1862, s. 130), but it is hardly just In strictness, the corporation were making a present to the conto the lessee in the case of winding up by the court, which is to tractor of the contract price, and it may be doubted whether, be deemed to commence “at the time of the presentation of the without a stronger and more modern decision than Reg. v. Prest, petition for the winding up” (Ib., section 84). In some instances an auditor would not be bound to disallow a payment so irregularly which have come under our notice the event specified is “ in case made. the company shall be wound up”; and in the recent case of In re Wetley Brick and Pottery Company (30 W. R. 445), the construction of this provision came before the court. It was contended
THE SUCCESS of the Government Bill for the further protection that under it the power of re-entry only accrued when the company of life in Ireland, when it has passed into an Act, will depend, in was completely wound up. The contention was hopeless enough, some degree, on the extent to which its provisions are known; and because it is obvious that upon this construction the proviso would be with the view of making them known as soon and as accurately as meaningless, for when the company is fully wound up all the possible, it may be well to provide that an abstract of the Act, or, if property will have been sold, which could never take place, as they be easily understood, of the principal sections, shall be posted regards the lease, so long as the lessor's right to re-enter existed. up in conspicuous places in the principal towns, and perhaps even in The fact that the question was raised at all, however, indicates the public-houses and railway stations. It might also be convenient inaccuracy of this form of proviso. The proper form would appear to add short extracts from the criminal statutes in force as to to be “ in case the lessees shall be in course of being wound up.
secret societies and the like. For instance, it is provided by 5 & 6 The decision
in the recent case shows the importance to the land- Vict. c. 28, s. 7, that if any person shall“ make use of any manner lord of the insertion in the proviso for re-entry of such a provision of force, or inflict, or threaten to inflict, any manner of bodily pain If it is inserted, he has only to apply by summons in the winding
to deter or prevent any person from giving up for leave to re-enter, and the court will order the liquidator to evidence in any suit or prosecution, civil or criminal, or on deliver up possession, without waiting for an action to be brought account of any persons having given evidence in any action or to recover the land. The exception in section 14 of the Con- prosecution, civil or criminal, or on account of any person having yeyancing Act, 1881 (6) (i.), of “a condition for forfeiture on the declined or refused to enter into any unlawful combination or bankruptcy of the lessee," would probably be held to extend to a agreement,” may be transported (or as the law now is, sent to condition for forfeiture on winding up, for section 2 (xv.) defines penal servitude) for seven years, or imprisoned for three years. “ bankruptcy" as including“ any other act or proceeding in law This offence, which was, by the Irish Act of Parliament, 27 Geo. having, under any Act for the tir being in force, effects or results 3, c. 15, a capital felony, is in England only an offence at common similar to those in bankruptcy.” But like most other parts of this law, and the punishment, not being contained in the Criminal Law wonderful measure, this provision leaves room for doubt.
Consolidation Acts of 1861, which apply to England and Ireland equally, is perhaps not sufficiently known in Ireland.
WE RECENTLY COMMENTED on the strict, but as we ventured to think correct, interpretation which the Court of Appeal has put IN ADDITION to the large Government reward offered for the on that section of the Public Health Act, 1875 (s. 174), which detection of the Phænix-park murderers, there has been at least requires contracts by urban sanitary authorities of an amount one such offer from a municipal corporation in Ireland, and Mr. exceeding £50 to be under seal. It was held in Young v. Corpora- PARNELL has suggested that all the municipal corporations should tion of Leamington (30 W. R. 500, L. R. 8 Q. B. D. 579) that join in offering rewards. Whether this suggestion was made this section—which had already been held to be imperative and not before or after the large Government reward was offered is not directory only in Hunt v. Wimbledon Local Board (L. R. 4 quite clear, but it is so very much to the point that it would be C. P. D. 48)—applies to executed as well as executory contracts. unfortunate if it were to meet with no response from the not But in Reg. v. Corporation of Norwich, decided by a divisional unnatural belief that if ten thousand pounds will not produce court on the 5th inst., Grove and LOPES, JJ., declined to apply so the desired result nothing will. It might, therefore, perhaps, be strict a rule to the case of an order for payment of money out of well if the local rewards were to be directed to the detection of the borough fund in discharge of a contract which the corporation the very numerous local murders of which the various municipal might, if they pleased, bave repudiated, as not being under seal, corporations have been made so unhappily cognizant within the under cover of section 174 of the Public Health Act. The last two years. And with the view of throwing the required contract was a paving one, and the question of law arises on the contributions equally upon all ratepayers, instead of the somewhat construction of one of the amending Municipal Corporation Acts, invidious practice of soliciting contributions from individuals, 7 Will
. 4 and 1 Vict. c. 78, s. 44. That section provides that power might very fairly be given to the various municipal cor“whereas it is expedient to give all persons interested in the porations in Ireland to charge upon their borough funds rewards borough fund
a more direct and easy remedy for any not exceeding a certain moderate amount. misapplication of such fund," an order of the council for the payment of any sum of money out of the borough fund may be removed by certiorari, and “ may be disallowed or confirmed with costs, according to the judgment and discretion of the court."
On the 6th inst., at the Central Criminal Court, Frederick George, a The corporation having made the order for payment of the contract lawyer's clerk, who was convicted of having forged a transfer of $172 38. 108. price, it was sought to relieve the town of the burden of the in the Consolidated Three per Cent. Annuities, and personated Mr. Robert payment by taking advantage of the section. But the two learned
But the two learned Bland Goodrich, the holder of the stock, in order to effect the transfer, was judges appear to have had no hesitation in discharging the rule brought up to receive judgment. Mr. Justice Hawkins, in passing sentence which had been obtained. GROVE, J., chiefly put his upon bim, remarked that the position which the prisoner held as a solicitor's clerk
was one requiring great integrity, and when confidence was betrayed by such elaborate judgment on the use of the word “misapplication” a person a serious punishment must follow. Moreover the prisoner had in the preamble, and pointed out that that word could been convicted of a serious fraud upon the Bank of England, and if the offence only cover cases of corrupt practices, or favouring an
were to be passed over with a light sentence, he should be endangering the individual corporator, and could not apply to a case where no mis- public and of justice, he felt that it was absolutely necessary that he should
property of hundreds of thousands of persons. Therefore, in the interest of the conduct, properly so called, was alleged, but all that could be pass upon the prisoner a sentence of seven years' penal servitade.
trustees commenced the present action of Heath v. Pugh in the FORECLOSURE AND THE STATUTES OF Common Pleas Division. The action was brought, not only against LIMITATION,
Pugh, but also against his tenant who was in possession of the
lands; but nothing was said on this point in any of the courts The case of Heath v. Pugh, which has recently been decided before which the case came, and the on was treated as if it had by the House of Lords (reported in this week's issue of the been against Pugh only. Had this action been brought immediately Weekly Reporter), is inferior to few in the vicissitudes of its upon, or even within a year or two after, the decision of the Court fortunes, and the practical importance of its ruling. The litiga- of Appeal in Heath v. Črealock, there would have been practically tion arose out of the frauds of one Crealock, a trustee of a no defence. But in 1878, more than twenty years had elapsed settlement; who, being also a solicitor, acted as solicitor to, and since the execution of the mortgage deed in 1856; and it so practical manager of, the trust. In 1856 he and his co-trustee happened that the plaintiffs, chiefly by reason of the absence of Heath, a guileless clergyman, lent some of the trust moneys to one Crealock, were unable to prove any such payment of principal or Stephens, upon a mortgage in fee of certain lands, including the interest as would be binding upon the defendant Pugh. This lands sought to be recovered in the recently decided action. In enabled Pugh to raise the defence of the statute, and the whole 1859 Stephens contracted for the sale of several portions of the interest and importance of the case lies in the varying fortunes of mortgaged lands, including the present lot, which was contracted this defence. to be sold to the defendant Pugh. Crealock, who acted as solicitor At the trial at Nisi Prius Denman, J., directed a verdict and for Stephens in relation to this contract, represented to him that gave judgment for the plaintiffs, upon the ground (as briefly his co-trustee Heath was abroad, and that great delay would be stated in the report of the appeal) that the foreclosure decree occasioned by obtaining his concurrence in the conveyance to the prevented the statute from being a bar to the action. This is the purchasers, or in a re-conveyance to Stephens; and the latter view which has finally prevailed. The court in Banc, consisting agreed that, to save trouble, the mortgage of 1856 should be con- of Lord Coleridge, C.)., and Lindley, J., reversed this decision, cealed from the purchasers. Crealock, in whose hands the title deeds and entered judgment for the defendants. It was a question were deposited for safe custody, accordingly colluded with him to whether they should not rather direct a new trial, in order to give make a fraudulent conveyance to the purchasers, including the de- the plaintiffs (who alleged that they had been taken by surprise) fendant Pugh, purporting to be free from all incumbrances except another chance of proving a payment to take the case out of the certain leases. Stephens, who had no design to do anything statute; but, in the first place, it by no means clearly appeared fraudulent, paid the purchase-money to Crealock, who embezzled that the plaintiffs had any evidence to produce; and, in the second it, concealed the payment, and continued, during some years, place, the court thought that a new trial, which, when asked upon regularly to pay the interest upon the whole of the mortgage these grounds, and under these circumstances, is something in the debt. This was only one of several other like transactions, into nature of an indulgence, ought not, as against an innocent dewhich we need not enter. Of course Crealock's embarrassments fendant who was a purchaser for value without notice, to be ultimately became overwhelming, and in 1870 he abscon ded, granted to plaintiffs who might, by proper diligence, have got all taking with him, among other things, the original mortgage deed they wanted from the beginning. The last point is well worthy of 1856. It only remained to determine which, out of several of notice; and we do not understand that upon this point the innocent persons, must suffer for Crealock's frauds. The other judgment has been overruled. To cut short the tale of litigation, trustee Heath immediately filed a bill in chancery against Crea- the judgment of the court in Bane was reversed, and that of lock, Stephens, and the several purchasers ; praying, as against Denman, J., restored, by the Court of Appeal, consisting of Lord Pugh, for a declaration that the lands were still subject to the Selborne, C., and Baggallay and Brett, L.JJ., and the House of mortgage, for foreclosure, and that he might be ordered to deliver Lords has recently affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeal. up the title deeds in his possession. This was the well-known The decision thus finally arrived at is no doubt better suited to case of Heath v. Crealock (23 W. R. 95, L. R. 18 Eq. 215, 10 the public convenience than the opposite decision would have Ch. 22). The right of Pugh to avail himself of the old equitable been ; and we can easily guess that the courts must anxiously have plea, that he was a purchaser for valuable consideration without desired to come to this conclusion if they possibly could. But we notice, in bar of any relief sought against him in a court of equity, cannot regard with unmixed satisfaction the process by which the evidently was, and the Court of Appeal held that it was, too clear result, in itself desirable, was arrived at. There was no dispute to be questioned. But the Vice-Chancellor allowed himself to be about the state of the law before the Judicature Acts; and it was misled by the case of Colyer v. Finch (19 Beav. 500, 5 H. L. C. not disputed that before the Judicature Acts the result of the 905). That case decided that a mortgagee may have foreclosure action must have been different. A foreclosure decree then had even against a purchaser for value without notice: a decision that no effect whatever upon the running of the statute as against is quite in accordance with principle; for foreclosure is in truth, the right to bring an action of ejectment. By what means not the granting of any equitable relief against the person fore- has a foreclosure decree acquired this power which it used closed, but is merely a declaration that equity will not afterwards not to have? It is useless, for this purpose, to insist upon interfere to prevent the person foreclosing from enforcing at the practical importance of the foreclosure decree, as being common law any rights to which he may be entitled. The Vice- necessary to the secure prosecution of the mortgagee's legal Chancellor, apparently not apprehending this distinction, and claim; because the decree possessed exactly the same practical imforgetting that, though by the Chancery Procedure Act a sale portance before the Judicature Acts, and yet was of no avail to might be ordered in a foreclosure suit, yet a sale is by no means intercept the running of the statute. And the question was not, the same thing as foreclosure, and ought not, therefore, to be as some seem to have thought, whether a foreclosure decree might granted as a matter of course in all cases in which foreclosure not very properly and reasonably possess this virtue of conferring would be granted, ordered the lands to be sold and the title deeds a new right to bring an action within the meaning of 3 & 4 Will, to be delivered to the purchasers. This decree was in 1874 varied 4, c. 27;
but something quite different-namely, How did it get by the then Court of Appeal in Chancery, consisting of the Lord this recent virtue, which, by the admission of everybody, it used Chancellor Cairns, and Lords Justices James and Mellish; who, not to have? And to this question we have found no satisfactory as against Pugh, reduced this part of the decree to a bare fore- reply. closure. The judgments then pronounced contain the most recent, The quality in question might have been expressly, and perhaps ample, and authoritative exposition of the equitable privileges of with great propriety, conferred upon foreclosure decrees by the a purchaser for value without notice. Though the decree also set Judicature Acts. But we think that such changes ought, when aside a re-conveyance to Stephens which had been fraudulently they are beneficial, to be openly introduced by legislation, instead obtained by Crealock's machinations, yet it left the defendant in of being smuggled in by dubious implication and remote conpossession of the lands, and no steps could be taken in the Court sequence. No refutation of his own conclusion could possibly be of Chancery to disturb him. Under the old system it was neces- more complete than the judgment of Lord Cairns. It is a specimen say for this purpose to bring an action of ejectment at law. For of such reasoning as he very seldom countenances by his example, some reason the plaintiff Heath in whom, with Crealock, and affords the best possible grounds for suspecting an opinion the legal estate was vested, delayed taking any such step for which such an advocate could do so little. Let the reader until a new trustee was appointed in 1878, when the two judge. We grant his postulate, that if the mortgage had