« PreviousContinue »
facts were shortly these :-In 1876 the Cornwall Minerals Railway Com- administration by the court and payment in of the $5,000. Upon the trial pany were in want of money, and their borrowing powers under their Act he now asked that the money should bo invested in the names of the trustees were nearly exhausted. Negotiations took place between them and the nominated by the legatee, but under the control of the court, claiming such Yorkshire Railway Wagon Company for a loan of £30,000. The railway relief as of course. Hall, V.C., however, said that the modern tendency of company were advised that they could not give a valid security for the pro. the court was to leave trust fands in the hands and under the control of posed loan, and it was suggested that the railway company should obtain the trustees, whenever they were properly there, and there was no ground for money by selling part of their rolling stock to the wagon company for a sum inferring that they were unsafe, and he therefore refused the relief asked. By of £30,000, and that at the same time the railway company should agree to consent an order was taken, whereby the legatee undertook to give the plain. hire that rolling stock from the wagon company for the term of five years, at a tiff notice of changes of investment, but the plaintiff was ordered to pay the rent which would repay the £30,000 and interest by the end of that period. costs of the action, liberty to apply being reserved.-SOLICITORS, Sewell & This arrangement was carried out by an agreement under seal between the Edwards ; Bowker, Peake, Bird, f Collins. companies, dated the 20th of June, 1876. In case of the due fulfilment of the agreement the railway company were to have the option, at the end of the five years, of repurchasing the rolling stock at a merely nominal
PRACTICE-PARTIES BROUGHT IN BY NOTICE UNDER RULES OF COURT, price. At the same time ihree of the directors of the railway | 1875, ORD. 16, R. 18-ISSUE BETWEEN SUCH PARTY AND THE DEFENDANT company personally guaranteed to the wagon company the payment of
-Costs-Ord. 16, RR, 17, 18, 20, 21.-In an action of Pilke v. Roberts, the rent. The rent baving fallen into arrear the wagon company before Kay, J., on the 6th and 8th inst., two questions were raised as to the brought the action against the railway company and the sureties for the practice under order 16. The action was brought to recover a sum of money amount of the rent due and for damages. Kay, J., beld that the professed said to be due under a building contract. The defendant claimed to have a sale and biring were in fact a borrowing of £30,000 on the security of the
right of indemnity again it a third person, as agent for whom he said he bad rolling stock, and therefore invalid as a security beyond the powers of the made the contract. He accordingly issued, and served on such person, a company, and that the transaction was, so far as the railway company were notice under ord. 16, r. 18. The third party got leave to defend, and concerned, ultrà vires and void, but that the guarantee was valid, and that the
delivered a defence and counter-claim. No relief was asked by the plaintiffs sureties were liable on their guarantee. The wagon company appealed, and
against the third party, and the defendant did not deny the plaintiff's claim, the sureties had also appealed. The Court of Appeal held that the transaction saying only that the third party was the perĖon to pay. KAY, J., said that of sale and hiring was really what it purported to be, and not a loan in dis. proceedings, no doubt, might have been taken under rulo 17 to get an order guise, and that it had been bona fide substituted for the loan which had been for the trial of the question between the defendant and the third party, but originally intended. The agreement was therefore valid and could be enforced | as this was not done, no such question could be tried; therefore, if the court against the railway company. The appeal of the sureties was dismissed.- on the facts could give judgment against the defendant, the case was at an SOLICITORS, Singleton & Tattershall ; Cope & Co.; Morley & Shirreff.
end. His lordship, on ihe facts, gave judgment against the defendant, with costs, the third party's counsel not having opened his counter-claim.
The plaintiff's counsel then asked for the costs occasioned by the third LUNATIC-ALLOWANCE TO NEXT OF KIN.--In a case of In re Evans. party's intervention. Against that it was contended that the order giving before the Court of Luvacy on the 6th inst., a question arose as to granting an leave to defend ought to bave made some terms as to the costs, that it not allowance out of the income of a lanatic to one of his next of kin. The having done so, no order could now be made. lunatic had an income of about £1,000 a year, of which only £425 a year was
KAY, J., said that sucb a direction was not necessary, as a person coming regoired for his maintenance. His next of kin were first cousins. One of into an action is subject to the judge's order as to costa, equally with other these was an Irish clergyman over eighty years of age, wbo, in consequence matters. On the opposite contention, even if the third party had succeeded of the disestablishment of the Irish Church, had been reduced to very poor in his counter-claim he could have had no costs.-SOLICITORS. Savidge & circamstances. He desired to have an allowance made to him out of the income Sleward ; Henry Wickens ; Routh, Stacey, g Castle, for George Mitchell of the lunatic, and the master had made a report by which be certified that | Seabroke. be approved of making an allowance of £100 a year to the applicant, if the court sbould think that it ought to be made. The court (JESSEL, M.R., and CHARITY-APPOINTMENT OF NEW TRUSTEES AND VESTING ORDERLINDLEY, L.J.) resused to grant the allowance. JESSEL, M.R., said that the CONSENT OF CHARITY COMMISSIONERS-CHARITABLE Trusts Act, 1853, s. applicant bad no legal claim and no moral claim. The principle on which the 62.-In the case of Ex parte The Committee of the Western Synagogue, St. court acted was laid down in Ex parte Whilbread (2 Mer. 99). No regard was Alban's place, Haymarket, before North, J., for Chitty, J., on the 4th inst., a to be naid to any interest of the next of kin in the lunatic's property. The
petition was presented for the appointment of new trustees of the Jewish Burial question was what was for the benefit of the lunatic. If the next of kin was Ground in St. Luke'e, Chelsea, and for a vesting order. The burial ground was, a person whom he was under a legal obligation to provide for, or if he was by a deed dated 1817, vested in trustees for the benefit of the members of the under some moral obligation to do something for him, by reason of his having Jewish congregation of a synagogue then existing in Denmark-court, Strand, given some promise, or baving already made some allowance, the court might but closed since the year 1826, when the present synagogue was opened in grant or continue an allowance. Illustrations of this were to be found in In
its place. It appeared that the ground was purchased and kept up by volun. re Blair (1 M. & C. 300) and in In re Frost (L. R. 5 Cb. 699), in the former tary subscriptions of the congregation. The trustees had long since died, of which cases Lord Cottenbam said that the principle involved ought to be and it could not be ascertained who was the last survivor. The question was narrowed rather tban extended in its operation, and that he would never exer- | raised whether the consent of the Charity Commissioners was necessary for cise such a jorisdiction without the greatest possible jealousy and caution. the purposes of suob an application. NORTH, J., adopting the ruling of the LINDLEY, L.J., said that the grant of the allowance must be, in some way or late Master of the Rolls in The Governors of the Charity for the Relief of other, for the lunatic's benefit.-SOLICITORS, Bower, Cotton, & Bower,
Poor Widows v. Sutton (27 Beav. 651), and of Hall, V.C., in The Royal
decided that the consent of the Charity Commissioners was not necessary, as PRIORITY OF INCUMBRANCE-NOTICE_ERRONEOUS REFERENCE IN NOTICE. - One of several points which arose upon an adjourned summons in an action
the property in question represented voluntary contributions.-SOLICITOR,
Tenis Davi of Whittingstall 7. Ring, before Hall, V.C., on the 6th inst., was as to the respective priorities of claimants to a reversionary estate. The question arose under the following circumstances:-The estate being in the hands of trustees
COPYRIGHT-Right OF REPRESENTATION-Prior PUBLICATION-MUSICAL of a will, the person beneficially interested in the reversion mortgaged bis
COMPOSITION-COPYRIGHT ACTS-COPYRIGHT ACT, 1842 (5 & 6 Vict, c. interest by deed, dated February 27, 1879, having previously put it into
45), s. 20.-In the case of Chappell y. Boosey, before North, J., sitting settlement by a deed dated June 28. 1875. No effectnal notice of the cattle. for Chitty, J., on the 3rd and 6th inst., the plaintiffs, a firm of music pub. ment was given to the trustees of the will until May, 1880, but the mortgagee lishers in Bond-street, claimed to be the registered proprietors of the copy. under the deed of February 27. 1879. gave formal notice to them in April. | right in a musical composition or song, with an accompaniment, called “The 1879, of a mortgage deed, stating the parties correctly as they appeared in
appeared in Bell-ringer," and also of the sole liberty of performing the same piece, and his security of February 27, 1879, but erroneously stating the date as being
sued the defendant for having, as one of the directors of the London Billad November 27, 1878. No deed of that date, in fact, existed, and it was sworn
Concerts, infringed their rights by permitting the song to be performed, by the mortgageo's solicitor that the date was stated in error, which was,
| without the plaintiffs' consent, at ihe St. James's Hall on the 14th of however, never corrected. The trustees of the settlement contended tbat the
December last. The defence set up by the defendant was that the song in notice must be taken to be ineffectual, as it did not, in fact, refer to the
question, with its accompaniment, was, some time prior to its public perform. alleged mortgage, but Hall, V.O., held that it was sufficient and operated to
ance, published and sold as a book within the meaning of that term in the give the mortgagee priority, and he made a declaration accordingly, -SOLICI.
Copyright Act, 1842. The plaintiffs demurred to tbis defence, and the ques. TORS, Barlee, Burgess, & Cosens ; Hepburn, Sons, g Cutliffe.
tion thus raised for the decision of the court was whether the publication of a dramatic piece or musical composition as a book, before it bas been publicly
represented or performed, deprives the author or his assignee of the exclusive PRACTICE_Trust FUNDS-INVESTMENT.-In an action of Braithwaite v. right he would otherwise have of representing or performing it. NORTH, J., Wallis, which was before Hall, V.O., for trial upon the 3rd inst., the plaintiff said that in his opinion the law stood thug. Under the Siatute of Anne the sought to have a trust fund invested under the control of the court under the author of a dramatio piece cr musical composition acquired a copyright in following circumstances:-A testator beqneatbed to a female legateo a sam his work so as to be enabled to prevent any other persons from multiplying of £5,000, free of duty, for her sole and separate use, and to be inveated by copies of it, but this did not prevent any one who thought fit to do so from trastees to be nominated by her, so that she should have the income for her representing or performing it. The privilege of an author of a dramaric piece life and without power of anticipation, and after her death the principal sum was extended by the Act of 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 15, commonly called Sir to fall into the testator's residuary estate, which he gave to his father, the Pulwer Lytton's Act, which provides that the author, or assign of the author plaintiff in the action. The testator appointed trustees and executors of his of any dramatic piece which was not printed or published, wbether theu will. Tbe plaintiff desired that some control should be retained over the already composed, or thereafter to be composed, should have as his own fund, and, as the legatee had refused to allow any interference, had brought property, and be proprietor of, the sole liberty of representing the same at the action against her and the surviving executor of the will, asking for any place of dramatic entertainment for a period not clearly defined and not at present material, and that the anthor, or assign of the author, of any such
(Before Mr. REGISTRAR MURRAY, acting as Chief Judge.) piece, wbich was printed and published after or within ten years before the
May 3.-Ex parte Watkin, Re De Ferner Brothers. passing of that Act, should have the like sole liberty of representing the same for the term of twenty-eight years from the passing of the Act, or from the
Whether an agreement can be legally come to between a trustee in publication of the piece, if it was first printed and published after the passing
| bankruptcy and his solicitor that, after deducting their respective disof the Act, or until the end of seven years after the author's death, which bursements, their“ other costs, charges, and remuneration" shall be ever should prove the longer. After the passing of this Act the author had, shared pro rata out of any sum available for that purpose, Qucere. therefore, two different rights, one that of copyright proper, preventing the Whether, when the terms of an agreement are in dispute, the Court of multiplication of copies of the piece itself, and the other being what may be Bankruptcy can exercise jurisdiction to adjudicate between the parties, called the acting or performing right, conferring upon him the power of Qucere. preventing others from representing the piece without his consent. That Act, But in any case, where the trustee fails to establish to the satisfaction bowever, did not extend or apply to musical compositions, except so far as I of the court the existence of the agreement. payment of the solicitor's thay came within the category of dramatic pieces or entertainmenis. By the Copyright Act, 1842, commonly known as Talfourd's Act, the rights of
| taxed costs will be ordered out of the estate. anthors were extended, and the authors of musical compositions acquired the This was an application on behalf of Mr. Thomas Edward Watkin, the double right-namely, first, that of copyright proper in the piece itself as a solicitor for the trustee of the property of the bankrapte, for an order that book; and, secondly, the performing rights, such rights having a somewbat the trustee should, within four days after service of the order to be made different period of duration. Although there were these two distinct statutory thereon, pay to the applioant the sum of £78 33. 98., being the amount due rights, it was said by the defendant that no person would purobase the piece to bim in respect of his costs as solicitor in the matter for the trustee, as in its book form, unless its sale conferred on the purchaser the right to make appeared by the taxing master's allocatur, dated February 9, 1882. any and every use of it he thought fit. But, in bis lordship's opinion, this The applicant, in his affidavit, stated that in the month of May, 1881, consequence did not follow, for it was only the performance of the piece bis bill of costs as the solicitor for the trustee of the bankrapts was carried in public which, under the Copyright Act, 1842, was prevented by the in for taxation, and, after many adjournments, the same was ultimately existence of the performing right, and it was obvious that the greater dnly taxed and allowed at the som of £98 153. 101., as appeared by the number of sales of musical pieces took place merely for the purposes of allocatur of the taxing master (Mr. Higgivs), dated February 9, 1882. private use. In the next place, if the publication of a musical composition On the taxation the trustee attended, and claimed to have a former taxa. as a book before the piece had been publicly performed prevented the sub. tion of costs against the separate estate of Jobn Henry de Fernex, one of sequent acquisition of any performing right, it must follow that the publica the bankrupts, re-opened, and to have the applicant's bill of coats, which tion of the same composition as a book at any time after the piece had been had been taxed against such estate on tbe higher ecale, re-taxed on the publicly performed would, from that time forward, put an end to any perform lower soale, and to have the difference between what was allowed and paid ing right in the piece existing prior to such publication, for the reasons to the applicant on the higher scale, and what should be allowed on re. existing in the former case would te of equal weight in the latter. taxation on the lower scale, repaid by the applicant to the trastee. If so, the author would be put to his choice either to abstain from puhlishing The taxing master acceded to the claim by the trastee, and re-opened the the book, and thus be unable to reap that copyright therein which the previous taxation, and found that, under the circumstances, the applicant Act had conferred upon him, in wbich case he would be confined to the bad been overpaid the sum of £20 123. 1d. He dedaoted the amount, and enjoyment of the performing right alone, or he might publish the book, and
ascertained tbat there was a net balance due to the applicant of £78 33, 9d., thereby lose his performing right; in other words, not only could the two
for whiob an allocatur was issued. statutory rights be not enjoyed simultaneously, but, more than that, the enjoy The trustee stated, with regard to a sum of £110 received by him as a ment of the one would be the destruction of the other. This would be the
part of tbe joint estate, that he considered it as applicable towards paynatural result if the defendant's contention was right, but his lordsbip was of
went of the costs and disbursements of the appliount and of himself in opinion that the Copyright Act, 1842, showed upon its face that the publici.
connection with the joint and separate estates of the bankrupts. The only tion of the piece as a book did not prevent the continuance of the performing
money received by him in respeot of the joint estate other than the £110 right. Much stress bad been laid by the defendant on the Digest of the Law
amounted to $47 8. 2d. of Copyright appended to the Report of the Copyright Commissioners, 1878,
On the 7th of May, 1878, he was appointed trustee, and at the same time but that was not a binding authority on the court. The demurrer by the
he was introduced to the applicant, and requested to appoint him his soli. plaintiffs was, therefore, allowed.-SOLICITORS, Wilkinson & Howlett; Boulton,
oitor in the matter. He had never previously, to his knowledge, either seen Sons, f. Sandeman.
or heard of the applicant. The amount of the assets under the bankraptoy was extremely uncertaio, and it was a matter of importance to bim (the trastee) that he sbould secure his own position when entering into business
relations with an unknown solicitor. He therefore took the precaution of CASES BEFORE THE BANKRUPTCY REGISTRARS. making an agreement with him previously to his so aoting, upon the terms
" that be should incor no personal liability to the applicant, but tbat, after (Before Mr. REGISTRAR BROUGHAM.)
deducting their respective disbursements, the other costs, obarges and remu. May 2.-Ex parte Sadler, In re Hawes.
neration of the applicant and himself should be shared between them pro In this case Hawes was a hosier, carrying on business in the Poultry,
rata out of any som available for or towards their disobarge.” The appliCheapside. He bad taken a lease of his premises in 1876 from Sadler, at a
cant denied the existence of the agreement in question, and the trustee
admitted that he had received sufficient assets to pay the amount of the rontal of £1,000 per annum. He at the same time porobased of the landlord |
applicant's claim. the fixtures and fittings of the shop for £800. In 1881 Hawes was made
Terrell, for the applicant. bankrapt, the above-mentioned fixtores, fittings, and furniture being still on
Yate Lee, for the trustee. the premises. A trustee was appointed, and in due course disclaimed tbe lease. The trustee baving removed and sold the fixtures, fittings, and
Mr. REGISTRAR MCRBAY said the solicitor was daly appointed with the fornitare, he was held wrong in doing so, and an inquiry was ordered as to
sanction of the committee of inspection, and prima facie his right was perwhioh of tbeca were attached to the premises, and the amount of damago
fectly olear, and the order for payment of his costs would be made as a mere wbich had been oaused by the removal. The inquiry was now taken before
matter of course. But in this case the trustee had set up by way of defence Mr. Registrar Brougham,
& special agreement between the solicitor and himself. (His honour
referred to it.] The first question, which was open to considerable C. L. Chubb appeared for the landlord, and
doubt, was whether that kind of agreement oould be legally oome to J. C. Earle for the trustee.
between a trustee in baokruptcy and his solicitor, however clear and precise
it might be in its terms, and whether such an agreement was one wbich the The fittings inoluded (1) gasburnere, &o. ; (2) show-cases and counters
court ought to regard or recognize in any shape or way in the administration attaobed to the walls and floors by short nails and screws; (3) ooppters of the estate. Being, moreover, an agreement outside the bankroptcy, could which had been placed on a floor which was afterwards concreted over, but it be said, when the terms of the agreement were in dispute, the case was one which were not fired by any pails or sorewe; (4) mirrors and olooks which came within the functions of this court to determine or adjudicate upon attached to the wall in the usual way, so that they could be readily detached between the parties? He should certainly hesitate before coming to any soch by drawing the nails wbich supported them; (5) furniture which was quite conclusion, or deciding that it was expedient, or even proper, that this court loose and detached.
should exercise any jurisdiction in the matter. Assuming, however, the Witnesses were called on both sides as to the manner in whiob the things affirmative of both those propositions to be tenable in law, then how did the in dispute were attached to the premises, and as to their value, and Mr. case stand in regard to the question of fact? On the one side the trustee Frank Lewis, of No. 95, Gresham-street, City, the anotioneer and valuer, deliberately stated upon oath a positive agreement between himself and the was called, and said that in his opinion, with the exception of the gas. solicitor. On the other the solicitor as deliberately and as positively denied burnere, the things were fittings which were always regarded as more the trustee's statement and the existence of any agreement at all. Toe evid. obattels such as could be distrained for reat,
ence was all on affidavit, and there was no cross-examination. How was it Eventaally Mr. REGISTRAR BROUGHAM held that the trustee was wrong in
possible for the court, sitting as a jury, to say which of the two is speaking
ihe truth? There were positively no materials before him which could enable removing or selling anything beyond the looge furniture, and that anything which was so attached to the premises that it could not be removed without
him to arrive at a verdict. His honour then referred to the auxiliary affidavits drawing a dail or a screw was a tenant's fixture, and therefore belonged to
filed on behalf of the trustee, which, in his opinion, amounted to nothing, and the landlord, and not to the trustee; the result of bis decision being that
to the correspondence between the applicant and the trustee, and held that the the trustee had to pay to the landlord the value of tbe things he had wrong.
trustee who had set up the defence had failed to establish it to his satisfaction, fully removed in addition to the damage done to the premises in the
rong: and, that being so, the only course he could take was to make the order asked
for, with costs out of the estate. removal.
Applicant in person. Solicitors, Deane & Chubb; William Sturt.
Solicitors for the trustee, Field, Roscoe, & Co.
LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL.
HENRY MARRIOTT RICHARDSON and CHARLES FREDERIC MARSHALL SOLICITORS' CASES.
(Richards in & Marshall), solicitors, Bolton, Lancashire. April 4. The High COURT OF JUSTICE.- Queen's Bench DIVISION.
business will te carried in by the said Henry Marriott Richardson (Sittings in Banc, before Grove and LOPES, JJ.)
[Gozette, May 9.] May 8.-In re Pruen. This was the case of a solicitor, Frederick Langford Pruen, who had been convicted of forgery, and against whom & rule had been granted to show
COMPANIES. cause why he should not be struck off the rolls.
The Court, upon the motion of Murray, for the Incorporated Law
LIMITED IN CHANCERY.
SANKEY BROOK and Ashton's GRBEN COLLIERIES COMPANY, LIMITED,-Creditors aro SOCIETIES.
required, on or before June 5, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to William Richardson, Preston, Monday, June 19, at 11, is
appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims LAW ASSOCIATION.
STRAHAN AND COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order of Chitty, J., dated April 29, it was
ordered that the company be wound up. Phelps and Co, Gresham st, solicitors for At the aspal monthly meeting of the directors, held at the ball of the
VASA MURBHINA GLASS COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding np, presented April Incorporated Law Society, Chancery-lane, on Thursday, the 4th inst., the
25, directed to be heard before Bacon, V.C., on May 13. Snell and Co, George st, following being present-viz., Mr. Tylee (chairman), and Mesgra. Biedle, | Mansion House, solicitors for the petitioner Burgeg, Lucae, Desborough, jan., Parkip, Sidney Smith, and A. B. Car-West FRONTINO AND BOLIVIA GOLD MINING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding penter (secretary), grants of £45 were made to three members, one new
up, presented May 2, directed to be heard before Chitty, J., on Saturday, May 13.
Davis and Co, Coleman st, solicitors for the petitioner member was eleoted, and the ordinary general business was transacted. WHITE OAK COLLIERY COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented May 4, The annual general court was fixed for the 25th inst., at three o'clock.
directed to be heard before Bacon, V.C., on Saturday, May 1 3. Clarke and Co, Lincoln's inn fields, solicitors for the petitioners
[Gazette, May 5.] ALYN BANK COAL AND CANXEL COMPAOY, LIMITED.-Hall, V.C., bas, by an order dated
April 6, appointed Robert Cockburn Miller, India st, Edinburgh, to be official liquidator Cotion WASTE CLEANSING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented May
3, directed to be heard before Fry, J., on Friday, May 19. Greene, Bedford row,
solicitor for the petitioners LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY.
GRAND DUCHESS SILVER, LEAD, AND BARYTES MINING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Creditorg
are required, on or before June 3, to send their names and addresses, and the par. Tuesday, May 9.-The society disoposed the questionIs it desirable ticulars of their debts or claims, to John Martin Winter, Market st, Newcastle upon in the interests of England that a tonnel should be constructed between Tyne. Friday, June 16, at 12, is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the Eogland and France ?" Mr. Kirk opened the question in the affi mative,
debts and claims
INDUSTRIAL OPERATIVE BRICKMAKING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, and was supported by Messrs. Mallam, 8: rickland, W. F. Barry, and Austin, presented May 4, directed to be heard before Hall, V.C., on May 26. Powell, Essex st, while Messrs. E. Robinson, Whitehead, Nicholls, Waller, Lloyd Jones, Hood, Strand, solicitor for the petitioner C. E. Barry, and Lemon, spoke in favour of the negative. The question was,
KEIGILEY HERALD NEWSPAPER COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order made by North, J.,
dated April 29, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Sharpe and Co, New on a vote being taken, negatived by a majority of ten votez. Thirty men. ct, Carey st, agents for Weatherhead and Burrs. Keighley, solicitors for the petitioner bers were presen!.
LONDON JUTE WORKS, 1871, LIMITED.-By an order made by Fry, J., dated April 23, it
Stephenson, solicitors for the petitioner
PLYMOUTH PIER COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented May 4,
directed to be heard before Fry, J., on May 19, Chamberlayne, Lincoln's inn fields, At a meeting of this society, held at Clement's-inn Hall, on Wednesday, solicitor for the petitioners May 3. Mr. E. F. Spence in the chair. Mr. Jeoks moved " That the power | SANKEY BROOK AND Astron's GREEN COLLIERIES COMPANY, LIMITED.-Chitty, J., has, married women now have over property ought to be curtailed." The opener
by an order dated April 1, appointed William Richardson, Preston, to be official
liquidator was supported by Messrs. Bartram and Spence, and opposed by Mosere. UPLEES BRICKFIELDS COMPANY, LIMITED.-Chitty, J., has, by an order dated Feb 27, Parsons, Tillotson, Sutoliffe, Dawbarn, Eiloart, and Harvey-Samce!. Mr. appointed Horace Woodburn Kirby, Coleman st, to be official liquidator Jepks then replied, and the motion, on being put to the meeting, was lost
[Gazette, May 9.)
UNLIMITED IN CHANCERY. by thirteen votes.
BUTE Docks LOAN SOCIETY.-By an order made by Chitty, J., dated April 28, it was
ordered that the society be wound up. Rees and Co, Frederick's pl, Old Jewry, BIRMINGHAM LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.
agents for Ensor, Cardiff, solicitor for the petitioner
CITY OF CHESTER BENEFIT BUILDING SOCIETY.-Chitty, J., has fixed May 16, at 11, at The usual fortnightly meeting of this society was held on Tuesday oven. his chambers, for the appointment of an official liquidator ing, May 9, at the Law Library, W. Fowler Carter, Esq., B.A., B.L., in
(Gazette, May 5.] the chair. 'New members baving been elected, and other special business
COUNTY PALATINE OF LANCASTER, disposed of, a debate took place on the following subject :-“1. Is there ang
LIMITED IN CHANCERY.
DERWEX DEG PANNOL-GWYN COPPER AND LEAD MIXING COXPANY, LIMITED.-Petition valid distinction between set-off' and 'counter-claim ?' 2. If so, should the
for winding up, presented May 3, directed to be heard before the Vice-Chancellor, at distinction be abolished for purposes of procedare ?". The speakers on the St George's Hall, Liverpool, on Saturday, May 13, Mather, Liverpool, solicitor for affirmative were Messrs. Barrow, A. Hebbert, E. C. Rogers, Ryland, and
[Gazette, May 5.] Restall, and on the negative, Messrs. G. T. Edwards and Swarbrick. The chairman bummed up, and pat each question separately to the vote, wben both were carried by large majorities in favour of the affirmative. A vote of thanks was then passed to Mr. Carter for presiding.
CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY.
LAST DAY OF PROOF.
Swansea Mr. ROBERT BENSON, solicitor, of Wigton, has been appointei Clerk to MANNING, John, Madeira villas, Twickenham, Secretary. May 18. Stone v Manning, the Wigton Board of Guardians, Assessment Committee, and Raral Sanitary
Chitty, J. Lewis, Ely place, Holborn Authority, and Superintendent Registrar for the district. Mr. Benson was
MUSGROVE, Sir John, Speldhurst, Kent, Baronet. May 18. Tyer v Waters, Chitty, J.
Layton, Budge row, Cannon st admitted a solicitor in 1866.
SHAW, FRANCES MARY, Hyde park terr. May 8. Hughes v Evans, Hall, V.C. Surr
and Co, Abchurch lane Mr. CHARLES EVELYN WELLBORNE, solicitor, of 17, Duke-street, South.
SIBBERING, WILLIAM, sen., Swansea, Grocer. May 25. Birchall v Brown, Fry, J. wark, Las been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Stevens, Swansea Court of Judicature.
[Gazette, April 21.] Mr. FREDERICK JAMES BLAKE, solicitor, of Wotton-under-Edge, has been
EYRE, HARRIET, Tennison st, Lambeth. May 10, Blatch v Woodman, Fry, J. Parnell,
Fenchurch st appointed Clerk to the County Magistrates at that place, in succession to SEATON, LELIA, Alexander sq, Brompton, May 24. Russell v Baring, Chitty, J. Davis Mr. Osborne Dauncey, deceased. Mr. Blake was admitted a solicitor in Cork st, Burlington gdns 1864.
TEMPLE, 'George, Plymouth, Gentleman. May 24. Temple v Hingston, Hall, V.C.
Chitty, J. Crossman, Theobald's rd, Gray's inn
[Gazette, April 25.] CHARLES HEATON HINDE, JOSEPH FARMER Milne, and John SUDLOW Fox, GEORGE, Bournemouth. May 28. Dawes v Druitt, Chitty, J. Druitt, jun, (Hinde, Milae, & Sudlow), solicitors, Manchester (as regards John Sudlow).
Bournemouth Jan. 1.
PAUL, THOMAS, Weelsby Clee, Lincoln, Licensed Victualler. May 31, Morris v
Saweard, Hall, V.C. Haddelsey, Great Grimsby HORACE PAILBRICK and SANDERSON CORPE (Philbrick & Corpe), solicitors, ROBERTS, CHRISTOPHER, Bristol, Drysalter. June 1. Tarleton v Bruton, Fry, J. 18, Austin Friars, London. May 2. The business of the late firm will in
Brittan, Bristol future be carried ou by Horace Philbrick solely, at 18, Austin Friars.
SOWDEN, ELIZABETH, Leeds. May 22, Jackson v Turner, Bacon, V.C. Wilkin,
Wakefield [Gazette, May 5.]
(Gazette, April 28.]
LEGISLATION OF THE WEEK,
adjourned. He was, however, unable to resume his argument, and although CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. CAP. 35.
he returned to Dablin he did not afterwards recover. Mr. McDonogh was LAST DAY OF CLAIM.
buried at the Mount Jerome Cemetery, Dublin, on the 21st inst. Lord DAVIES, ELIZA MARY, Brighton rd, South Hornsey. May 27. Llewellyn and Ackrill O'Hagan and many members of the Irish bench and bar attended the funeral,
HOUSE OF LORDS.
May 4.-Bills Read a Second Time. lane
PRIVATE BILLS. -Northampton Corporation; Metropolitan Board of Works HARVEY, WILLIAM, Plymouth, Merchant. May 31. Curteis and Pearse, Plymouth HENRY, ELIZA, Princes sq, Bayswater. June 2. Coburn and Young, Leadenhall st
(Various Powers). HILL, HENRY Thomas, Felton Rectory, Hereford, Clerk in Holy Orders. June 1.
Bills Read a Third Time. Beddoe, Hereford
Private BILLS.- Greenwich and Millwall Subway; Rhondda and Swacsea HOWELL, THOMAS, Birmingham Heath, Gent. May 28. Duke, Birmingham HUTTON, HENRY, Colnbrook, Buckingham, Esq. "June 1. Stoneham and Co, Philpot
Bay Railway. lane, Fenchurch st
New Bill. KELLY, JOHN, Wells st, Oxford st, Professor of Music. Vay 26. Barker, Bedford row Bill to alter and amend the law relating to marriage with a deceased wiso's KINGSFORD, Rev BRENCHLEY, Shadwell Rectory, Clerk in Holy Orders. July 1. I sister (EARL of DALHOUSIE). _Wightwick and Co, Canterbury KITCHING, ALFRED, Darlington, Durham, Esq. May 31. Hutchinson and Lucas, Dar.
May 5.---Bill Read a Second Time. lington
Private BILL.-Millwall Dock.
Bills Read a Third Time.
PRIVATE BILL8.-Limehouse Sabway; Bristol City Corporation of the Poor, MOIR, ROBERT, West Teignmouth, Devon, Esq. July 1, Whidborne and Tozer, Teign.
May 8.- Bill Read a Third Time.
May 9.-Bills Read a Second Time.
PRIVATE BILLS.-Dixie's Estate ; Cyfarthfa Works ; Metropol tan Markets RAE, GEORGE, Liverpool. May 31. Thompson and Shatwell, Liverpool
(Fish, &c.) ; Horncastle Water. SPEDDING, THOMAS, Southport, Lancaster, General Agent. May 27. Coppock, Stock Union of Benefices (London); Pluralities Acts Amendment ; Militia Store
port TAYLOR, ROBERT, Derby, Hotel Manager. June 10. Flint, Derby
houses. WHITE, JOAN, Leighton Buzzard, Bedford, Wine Merchant. June 10. Newton, Leighton
Bill Read a Third Time, Buzzard
PRIVATE BILL.-Birkenhead Borough. Wilcox, MATTHEW, Handsworth, Stafford, Jeweller. May 30. Fowke, Birmingham
[Gazette, April 28.]
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
May 4.-Bill Read a Second Time.
Bill in Committee.
Municipal Corporations (Clauses 9—108).
Bills Read a Third Time.
PRIVATE BILLS.-Abbotsbury Railway ; Bromsgrove Gas ; Ipswich Tram. The Right Hon. Sir Thomas Erskine Perry, knight, died at his resi- |
ways (Extensions); King's College, London; Liverpool Improvement, dence, 36, Eaton-place, on the 22nd ult., alter several months' illness. The
May 8.--Bills Read a Second Time. deceased was the son of Mr. James Perry, many years editor of the Morning
PRIVATE BILLS.-Scottish Widows' Fund and Life Assurance Society; Pier Chronicle, and was born in 1806. He was educated at the Charterbouse, and
| and Harbour Provisional Orders. at Trinity College, Cambridge, and afterwards studied at the University
Bills Read a Third Time. of Munich. He was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Michaelmas PRIVATE BILLS.--Todmorden Water ; Local Government (Highways) Provi. Term, 1834 (having previously been a pupil in the chambers of the late Mr. sional Orders. Justice Patteson), and he practised for several years on the Home Circuit. He
May 9.-Bills Read a Second Time. became known as a law reporter, in connection with Neville and Perry's, and PRIVATE BILL. —Carnarvon (Morfa Seiont Common). Perry and Davison's, series of Queen's Bench Reports. In 1841 he was ap Settled Land ; Consolidated Fund (No. 2); Ballot Act Continuance and pointed poisne judge of the Supreme Court at Bombay, and he received the Amendment; Copyright (Works of Art). honour of knighthood, and be held that office for eleven years. He was very
Bills in Committee. highly esteemed by both the European and the Native community at Bombay. Municipal Corporations (passed through Committee) ; Documentary Evidene He was for some years President of the Indian Board of Education, in recog - (passed through Committee; Military Mancouvres (passed through Committee) nition of his services in which capacity he was, on bis return to England, Parliamentary Elections (Corrupt Practices). presented with a testimonial of £5,000, which was, at his request, applied to the foundation of a law professorship. 'Sir E. Perry was at all times an active
Bill Read a Third Time, member of the advanced Liberal party. In 1831 he was honorary secretary
Boiler Explosions. to the National Political Union of London, and he was for some time one of
Nero Bills. the proprietors of the Examiner. He was an unsuccessful Liberal candidate
Bill for the amendment of the Judicature Aots (Sir H. GIFPARD). for Chaibam in 1832, and for Liverpool in 1852, and he represented Devon.
Bill to amend the law of copyright relating to musical compositions (Mr. port from 1854 till 1859. He was a frequent speaker in the House of Commons,
GORST). especially on Indian subjects. In 1859 he was appointed by Lord Halifax to
May 10.-Bill Read a Second Time. a seat on the Council of the Secretary of State for India, and he held that post
Capital Panishment for nearly twenty-three years. He retired on account of failing health about
Bill in Committee. four months ago, when, in recognition of bis long public services, he was
Consolidated Fand (No. 3). created a Privy Councillor. Sir E. Perry had been twice married, bis second
Bills Read a Third Time. wise being a daughter of the late Sir John Jobastone, Bart.
Military Mancuvres ; Documentary Evidence.
MR. FRANCIS MCDONOGH, Q.C. Mr. Francis McDonogh, Q.C., died at his residence, 41, Rutland-square, Dublin, on the 18th ult., at the age of seventy-seven, after a few weeks' illness. Mr. McDonogh was born in 1805. He was educated at Trinity College, On the 5th inst., in the House of Commons, Sir H. Giffard asked the Dublin, and he was called to the Irish bar about the year 1828, and he prac Attorney General whether he could give any assurance that the rules about tised until within a few weeks of his death. He was a bencher of the King's to be promulgated in relation to trial by jury, pleadings, and appeals would Ions, and almost the oldest Queen's Counsel in practice, and the length of his be laid upon the table of the House soon enough to enable a full discussion professional career may be illustrated by the circumstance that he was one of to take place upon them. The Attorney.General said that these rules were ihe counsel for the defence in the O'Connell trial in 1843, while he also made under the Judicature Act of 1875, and would come into operation as defended some of the accused persons in the prosecution of the Land League in 8000 as they were promulgated. All that was required was that forty days the early part of last year. He was one of the leading advocates of the Irish after coming into operation they should be laid upon the table of the House. bar, being gifted with great eloquence and readiness, and he had considerable Sir H. Giffard said that, in consequence of the answer he had received, he influence with juries. Mr. McDonogh's political career was a somewhat would move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Act in that respect. In varied one, and he had more than once changed bis politics, but in 1865 he introducing this Bill on Tuesday last, he said that among other questions was elected M.P. for the borough of Sligo in the Conservative interest, though whieb had been brought to the attention of the Governme he failed to secure re-election at the general election in 1868. He had frequently by jury and the operation of the rules under the Judicature Acts. Under been engaged in Irish appeals before the House of Lords. Early in February those Acts the judges had it in their power, if they chose, by the mere publi. he was opening the appeal in Niel v. The Duke of Devonshire before the House cation of rules, to abolish trial by jury in several cases, and the only check on when he was seized with iilgees, and the further hearios of the case was that power was that, within forty days after the rules had been laid upon the
Und FRIDAD A Erupts
table of the House, the House might disagree to thenı ; but until a resolution to that effect was passed the rules were at once operative, so that it was possible by a mere rule at once to sweep away the safeguard of trial by jury. It was never intended tbat the Judicature Acts should have such an effect, and he believed the Bill he now proposed to introduce met with the approval of the Government. He therefore moved for leave to introduce a Bill to amend
FRIDAY, May 5, 1882. the Judicature Acts, 1873 and 1875, so as to render it necessary that the rules
Under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. made by the Committee of Judges should be laid upon the table of the House
Creditors must forward their proofs of debts to the Registrar.
To Surrender in the Country, for forty days before coming into operation.
Cook, John, Bristol, Wholsale Tea Dealer. Pet May 2. Harley. Bristol, May 19 at
2.30 Dodd, Joseph, Llanelly, Brecknock, Farmer. Pet May 1. Shepard. Tredegar, May
22 at 11
Fisher, Alfred, Gorleston, Suffolk, Outfitter. Pet May 3. Worlledge. Great Yarmouth,
May 17 at 3
19 at 3
Jackson, George, Robert Maddison, and John Pattinson, Alston, Cumberland, Alston
Lime Company. Pet May 3. Norman. Carlisle, May 17 at 3
Johnson, Samuel, Nottingham, Grocer. Pet May 1. "Patchitt. Nottingham, May 16
v. O. Bacon. V.0. HALL.
Maggs, Oliver, Bourton, Dorset, Flax Spinner. Pet May 4. Wilson. Salisbury, May
17 at 2 Monday, May 15 Mr. Koe Mr. Latham Mr. Pemberton Matts, Joseph, Isleworth, Wagon Builder. Pet May 2. Ruston. Brentford, May 23
at 2 Tuesday.........
McKinnell, Alexander, Leeds, Tailor. Pet April 29. Marshall. Leeds, May 24 at 11 Wednesday......
Millard, Frederick John, Salisbury, Wilts, Innkeeper. Pet May 2. Wilson. Salisbury, Thursday .....
May 17 at 11
Pemberton Morton, Alfred, Clapham pk rd, Musical Instrument Maker. Pet April 25. Wil. Saturday
loughby. Wandsworth, May 19 at 11
| Riley, Joshua Armitage, and Joseph Armitage Riley, Halifax, Estate Agents. Pet
TUESDAY, May 9, 1892.
Under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869.
Creditors must forward their proofs of debts to the Registrar.
To Surrender in London.
Carrington | Miller, Henry Edward Campbell, Seething lane, Wine Merchant. Pet May 4. Hazlitt. Friday .......
Jackson May 24 at 11
Carrington Pearse, George, and Frederick Banyard, Rigeley rd, Kensal Green, Builders. Pet May
6. Hazlitt. May 24 at 11 Sheen, Henry, Camden st, Walworth, Corn Dealer. Pet May 6. Pepys. May 24 at 11.30
To Surrender in the Country.
Archer, Smith, Dewsbury, Beerhouse Keeper. Pet May 5. Tennant. Dewsbury, May RECENT SALES.
22 at 12
Bradford, Frank, Roath, Cardiff, Bank Clerk. Pet May 3. Langley. Cardiff, May At the Stock and Share Auction Company's sale, held on Friday, the 5th
23 at 12.30 inst., at their sale rooms, Crown-court-buildings, Old Broad-street, the Crossley, William, Halifax, Broker. Pet May 4. Rankin. Halifax, May 22 at 11 following were amongst the prices obtained - La Plata Mining and Smelting Jagger, Thomas, Sandy, Bedford, Dealer in Jewellery. Pet May 4. Pearse. Bedford,
May 17 at 11.30 10dol. shares, £2 ls. 3d. ; Electric Light and Power Generator £1 shares,
Littlefair, William, Barnoldswicke, York, Greengrocer. Pet May 6. Lee. Bradford, £1 18. 9d.'; Silver Peak Mining £1 shares, 48. 6d. ; Colombian May 22 at 10 Hydraulic Mining £1 shares, 108.; S. B. Lambe & Co. £1 Newton, John, Sunderland, Tailor. Pet May 4. Ellis. Sunderland, May 23 at 12 shares, 12s. 68. ; Dieu Donne Gold' £1 sbares, 18. 60.; Pure Beverage £1
Spencor, Jabez, Huddersfield, Beerhouse Keeper. Pet May 5. Jones. Huddersfield,
May 24 at 11 sbares, 99. 6d.; Eureka (Nevada) Mines, 48. 4d. ; aud other miscellaneous Tusting, John, Kingston upon Hull, Horse Dealer. Pet May 4. Rollit. Kingston upon securities fetched fair prices. At the sale, held on Tuesday, the 9th inst., the Hull, May 24 at 3 followiog were amongst the prices obtained :-Short Horn Dairy £l shares, Wright, Thomas Hollis, Park shot, Richmond, Gentleman. Pet May 5. Willoughby. fully paid, 223. ; Ladies' Dress Association £5 shares, £3 paid, 48. ; La Plata
Wandsworth, May 19 at 11 Miping and Smelting 10dol. shares, fully paid, £2 23. 60. ; Lady Bertba
TUESDAY, May 9, 1882. United Copper £1 shares, fully paid, 158, ; Silver Peak Mining £1 shares, Lindheimer. Charles Louis, Berkeley rd, Regent's pk, Gentleman. May 1 fully paid, 4s. 6d.; Electric Light and Power, 18. 9d. premium; and other miscellaneous securities fetched fair prices.
Liquidations by Arrangement. Messrs. Jenner & Dell, auctioneers and house agents, Regency-square,
FIRST MEETINGS OF CREDITORS. Brighton, bave sold by private treaty another of the freebold mansions in
FRIDAY, May 5, 1882. Queen's Gardens, Brighton, facing the sea, together with the oontents of the residence, for the sum of £12,500.
Alberts, Charles, Leeds, Wool Merchant. May 17 at 3 at office of Killick and Co, Com
mercial Bank bldgs, Bradford Mr. F. Ellis Morris, of the Poultry, sold by auction at the Mart, on Wednes Allen, Charles Burton, St John's hill, New Wandsworth, Baker. May 19 at 2 at office day, the freehold premises, No. 9, Cornbill. The property, covering an area of Armstrong, Chancory lane of 780 feet, realized $25,050, or about £33 per superficial foot, and
Archer, William, and John Henry Archer, Brompton, nr Northallerton, York, out of
business. May 24 at 3 at office of Teale, Northallerton £1,565 103. per foot (rontage. These figures work out nearly at a million Asquith, Ezra, Thornhill, York, Farmer. May 18 at 3 at office of Ibberson, Westgate, and a half per acre.
Bath, Frederick John, Bradford on Avon, Wilts, of no occupation. May 18 at 1 at the SALES OF ENSUING WEEK.
George Hotel, Chard. Bartrum and Bartlett, Bath
Batten, William Rowsell, Taunton, Somerset, Butcher, May 12 at 11 at office of Foster, May 16.-Messrs. WEATHERALL & GREEN, at the Mart, at 2 p.m., Freehold East st, Taunton Properties (800 advertisment, this week, p. 4).
Bayliss, James, Cheltenham, General Dealer. May 18 at 11 at office of Clark, Regent May 17.-Mesere. FAREBROTHER, ELLIS, CLARK, & Co., at the Mart., at 2 p.m.,
st, Cheltenham Leasehold Property (see advertisement, May 6, p. 4).
Botten, William Henry, East Malling, Kent, Farmer. May 18 at 3 at 13, Earl st, Maid
stone. Norton and Son May 17.-Messrs. EDWIN Fox & BOUSPIELD, at the Mart, at 2 p.m., Freehold Bown, James, Abergavenny, Monmouth, Baker. May 18 at 10 at 11, Frogmore st, Property (808 advertisement, May 6, p. 3).
Abergavenny. Hodgens, Abergavenny
Kennedy st, Manchester
Brittan, George, jun, Balham, Surrey, Builder. May 19 at 2 at Guildhall Coffee-house,
Gresham st. Davie, New inn, Strand alvertisement, April 29, p. 4).
Clark, William Henry, Ware, Hertford, Hotel Keeper. May 25 at 12.30 at Saracen's
Cook, James William, Victoria pk rd, South Hackney, Boot and Shoe Manufacturer.
Barstow sq, Wakefield
Crompton, Maria, Sale, Chester, Bookseller. May 17 at 3 at office of Shippey and Field,
Cooper st, Manchester
Crowther, Tom, John Crowther, and Alfred Crowther, Oldham, Builders. May 18 at
Cutting, Frederick William, Delaford rd, Rotherhithe New rd, Insurance Agent. ROBINSON.-May 2, at Beverley-house, Toronto, Canada, the wife of Christopher
May 18 at 3 at the Masons' Hall tavern, Masons' avenue. Fowler and Co, Borough Robinson, Q.C., of a daughter.
High st, Southwark
Dietz, Carl, Wardour st, Oxford st, Manufacturing Jeweller. May 18 at 2 at 269, High MARRIAGE.
Holborn. Solomon, Holford sq MARGETTI-DOVE.-May 4, at Deben ham, Suffolk, Alan Clarke Margetts, of
Earl, Stephen, and William Woodfield Philp, London Wall, Brass Founders. May 16 at
12 at office of Shearman, Gresham st Cbatteris, Cambo, solicitor, to Emily Catherine, daughter of the late William Eaton, Henry Joseph, Broadwinsor, Dorset, Auctioneer, May 18 at 3.30 at King's Arm Dove, of old Hall, Debenham.
Hotel, Dorchester. ' Watts, Yeovil
English, James, Malmsbury rd, Bow, Grocer. May 23 at 11 at offices of Naylor and Co, CEPUIS' RIFLECTORS FOR TH) NAYY,- Manufactory, 60, Fleet-street, -[ADYT.] Broad st bldgs, Liverpool st. Everill, Marylebone rd