Liquidations by Arrangement. FIRST MEETINGS OF CREDITORS. FRIDAY, May 26, 1882. Ainsworth, Cyrus, Elton, Bury, Lancaster, Nurseryman. June 12 at 3 at offices of Watson Broad st, Bury Baguley, James, Liverpool, Ironmonger. June 7 at 2 at office of Edwards, Brockley bldgs, South John st, Liverpool Beesley, Julian West Robinson, Accrington, Lancaster, Plasterer. June 8 at 11 at Derby Hotel, Accrington. Ballard and Sandeman, Accrington Bell, William Bainbridge, Lancaster, Joiner. June 13 at 11 at offices of Holden and Whelon, Church st, Lancaster Bennet, John, Bristol, Leather Merchant. June 7 at 3 at office of Evans, Exchange bldgs East, Bristol Bissett, Richard, Okehampton, Devon, Coal Merchant. June 9 at 2 at office of South- Bottomley, Sidney, Bradford, Pork Butcher. June 12 at 3 at offices o Atkinson and Boulton, Joseph, Manchester, Accountant. June 7 at 10.15 at Clarence Hotel, Piccadilly, Manchester. Stevenson, Hanley Bradford, Roger, Chawleigh, Devon, Boot and Shoe Maker. Jure 9 at 12 at office of Brady, Thomas, Manchester, Provision Merchant. Bullock, William, Droitwich, Worcester, Blacksmith. June 14 at 3 at office of Haslam, June 7 at 11 at office of Tree, Bunting, Stuart, Bond ct, Walbrook, Wine Merchant. June 5 at 3 at 262, High Holborn. Staniland, Cheapside Burr, Henry, Maidstone, Painter. June 3 at 11 at office of Stenning, Earl st, Maid stone Buxton, Thomas, Radcliffe on Trent, Nottingham, Builder. June 12 at 12 at office of Carter, Thomas William, Wolverhampton, Stafford, Butcher. Clayton, Henry, and Mary Ann Clayton, Leeds, Confectioners. June 7 at 1 at offices of Colcock, William Henry, Devonport, Devon, Cook. June 8 at 12 at office of Huchings, Cook, Edward, Luton, Bedford, Straw Hat Manufacturer. June 8 at 3 at Red Lion Hotel, Castle st, Luton. Miller and Co, Luton, Beds Cooke, George, Bradford, Provision Merchant. June 12 at 11 at offices of Terry and Co, Market st, Bradford Cooke, Thomas, Woolwich, Haberdasher. June 9 at 3 at offices of Sampson, Parson's hill, Woolwich Crossley, John, and Lewis Crossley, Halifax, Dyers. June 7 at 3 at the White Lion Hotel, Halifax. Kerr, Halifax Davies, William, Dolgelly, Merioneth, Commission Agent. June 13 at 11 at the Court house, Aberystwith Day, Robert, Queen Victoria st, Licensed Victualler. June 13 at 2 at the Law Institution, Chancery lane. Mackeson and Co, Lincoln's inn fields Duke, Arthur, Sheffield, Builder. June 6 at 11 at the Law Society, Hoole's chbrs, Bank st, Sheffield. Rodgers and Co Edmonson, James, Sale, Chester, out of business. June 8 at 3 at offices of Gaunt and Grainger, Queen's chbrs, John Dalton st Edmundson, William, Blackburn, Builder. June 14 at 2.30 at offices of Cooper, Northgate, Blackburn Edwards, James Maclean, Treorky, Glamorgan, Draper. June 8 at 1 at 39, Broad st, Bristol. Price, Pontypridd Evans, David, Llanelly, Carmarthen, Grocer. June 13 at 11 at offices of Howell, Stepney st, Llanelly Evans, William, Newcastle under Lyme, Stafford, Picture Frame Maker. June 6 at 11 at offices of Griffith, Newcastle under Lyme Eynon, David, Tredegar, Monmouth, Draper. June 9 at 11 at offices of Shepard, Queen st, Tredegar Fanshawe, Henry Horatio, Founders' Hall, St Swithin's lane, Solicitor. June 5 at 11 at offices of Chamberlain, Basinghall st Fenard, Thomas, Llanelly, Carmarthen, Shipbroker. June 13 at 11 at offices of Howell, Stepney st, Llanelly Finch, David, Lavender rd, Enfield, Builder. June 8 at 3 at offices of Benham, Gt James st, Bedford row Flitton, John, Salcot rd, Wandsworth, Builder. June 12 at 3 at offices of Hulbert, Coleman st Fogwill, Harry, Portsmouth, of no occupation. June 6 at 11 at offices of Casey, St George's sq, Portsea. Bramsdon, Portsea Ford, George, Rochester, Tailor. June 6 at 3 at 22, High st, Chatham. Norman, Chatham Goodrede, Mary Ann, Tipton, Stafford, Beerhouse Keeper. June 8 at 11 at the George Hotel, Bilston. Bowen, Bilston Gorvin, George Henry, Abergavenny, Saddler. June 14 at 12 at offices of Sayce and Baker, Lion st, Abergavenny Gosling, Henry, Waltham Cross, Hertford, Stone Mason. June 8 at 11 at offices of Benham, Gt James st, Bedford row Gregory, Edward, Tiverton, Devon, Grocer. June 15 at 11 at offices of Walker and Battiscombe, Water lane, Gt Tower st. Cockram, Tiverton Hall, Walter Henry, Bristol, Confectioner. June 9 at 11 at office of Linley, Bank of England chbrs, Broad st, Bristol. Peters, Bristol Harries, David Griffith, Promenade, Camberwell, Draper. June 12 at 2 at offices of Boyes and Child, Poultry. Kent, Bucklersbury Harris, Edwin, Chester, Grocer. June 13 at 12 at Angel Hotel, Dale st, Liverpool. Churton, Chester Hatton, Thomas, Derby, Grocer. June 12 at 12 at offices of Robotham, St Alkmund's Hanghan, William, Kirkoswald, Cumberland, Miller. June 9 at 2.30 at office of Arnison, e thing lane, Lighterman, June 5 at 3 at Guildhall Hockley, William John, Ipswich, Leather Seller. June 9 at 11 at 83, Gresham st. Block and Wollaston, Ipswich Holton, John Henry, Sheffield, Chemist. June 9 at 11 at office of Porrett, Bank st, Horsey, Albert, Woking Station, Builder. June 13 at 2 at office of Hicks, High st, Jenkins, Charles, St Issells, Pembroke, Baker. June 5 at 12 at 39, Broad st, Bristol, in lieu of the place originally named Johnstone, Charles Richard, Birmingham, Surgeon. June 5 at 3 at office of Freeman, Colmore row, Birmingham Jones, Daniel, Merthyr Tydfil, Carpenter. June 10 at 3 at office of Vaughan, High st, Merthyr Tydfil Jones, Edward, and Thomas Edward Jones, Llanberis, Carnarvon, Tailors. June 14 at 12 at Queen's Hotel, Railway Station, Chester. Williams and Hughes, Carnarvon Kempson, David, Luton, Straw Hat Manufacturer. June 6 at 3 at Queen's Hotel, Luton. Wells, St Albans Kenvin, William John, Southampton, Watchmaker. June 12 at 3 at office of Hodgson and Price, Waterloo st, Birmingham Lane, George, Everington st, Fulham, Builder. June 8 at 10.30 at office of Tippetts, Gt St Thomas Apostle Laslete, James, Ramsgate, Grocer. June 10 at 1 at Fleur de Lis Hotel, Canterbury. Thomson, Ramsgate Lay, Henry John, St Clement's st, Barnsbury, Carman. June 5 at 3 at 390, City rd. Popham, Vincent ter, Islington Lewis, Henry, Bristol, Boot Dealer. June 7 at 2 at office of Sibly and Dickinson, Exchange West, Bristol Manners, John Edward, Bradford, Potato Salesman. June 1 at 3 at office of Neill and Broadbent, Kirkgate, Bradford Mark, William Bell, Brampton, Cumberland, Butcher. June 8 at 3 at offices of Carrick and Co, Brampton Martin, Henry, Birmingham, Estate Agent. June 6 at 2 at office of Rowley and Chat. win, Temple row, Birmingham Miles, Christopher Charles, and Ernest Albert Miles, Salisbury, Brewers. June 12 at 3 at White Hart Hotel, Salisbury. Lee and Co, Salisbury Motum, Jeremiah, Grundisburgh, Suffolk, Blacksmith. June 14 at 3 at Traders' Association, Post Office chmbrs, Ipswich. Birkett and Bantoft, Ipswich Nichols, John Baldwin Dickinson, Swansea, Brewer. June 9 at 2 at office of Jellicoe, Prospect pl, Swansea Oakes, Thomas, Northwich, Chester, out of employment. June 6 at 10 at Royal Hotel, Crewe. Green and Dixon, Northwich O'Donovan, John Neil, Cannington, Somerset, Schoolmaster. June 10 at 11 at office of Roberts, All Saints ct, Bristol Parkin, Simon, Stanhope, Durham, Innkeeper. June 9 at 11 at office of Stillman, North Bondgate, Bishop Auckland Parrott, Thomas, Banner st, St Luke's, Card Board Manufacturer. June 8 at 2 at office of Poole, Bartholomew close Pearse, Thomas, New Swindon, Wilts, Bootmaker. June 5 at 10 at office of Boodle, Pink, William Sabine, Fareham, Coachmaker. June 8 at 12 at office of Morris, Mitre Robson, John Henry, Glossop, Derby, Chemist. June 12 at 3 at office of Simpson and Sadd, Charles, Hollingsworth st, Holloway, Timber Merchant. June 12 at 1 at Law Institution, Chancery lane. Smith, Staple inn Sanderson, James, Colby rd, Lambeth, Licensed Victualler. June 6 at 12 at office of Allen, Southampton bldgs, Chancery lane Schartan, Richard Henric Barfotte, Peckham, Commercial Clerk. June 8 at 12 at office of Stoneham and Co, Philpot lane Schmitz, Connop Leonhard, Ealing Dean, Gent. June 15 at 12 at office of Sheard, Union ct, Old Broad st Simons, Edwin, Birmingham, Bricklayer. June 19 at 11 at office of Robinson, Cherry st, Birmingham Skinner, Alfred, Anley rd, Hammersmith, Builder. June 7 at 12 at office of Knight and Ravenhill, New Broad st Songhurst, Jabez, Altrincham, Chester, Joiner. June 9 at 3 at Royal Hotel, Mosley st, Manchester. Atkinson and Co, Manchester Spurrier, William James, Birmingham, Publisher. June 9 at 3 at office of Southall, Waterloo st, Birmingham Stones, Alfred, Leeds, Lime Merchant. June 8 at 3 at office of Granger, Bank st, Leeds Tatam, Robert William, Liverpool, Butcher. June 14 at 3 at offices of Jones and Co, Church st, Liverpool. Faithwaite, Liverpool Thorley, Joseph, Exeter, Professor of Music. June 8 at 3 at the offices of Friend, Post Office chmbrs, Gandy st. Exeter Thrale, Thomas, Weathampstead, Herts, Baker. st. St Albans. Ody, Blackfriars rd June 9 at 1 at Cock Hotel, St Peter's Tibbetts, Edward Thomas, South st, Clerkenwell, Lithographic Printer. June 3 at 1 at offices of Marshall, Chancery lane Townsend, Charles, Birmingham, Stamper. June 9 at 11 at offices of Jackson and Sharpe, High st, West Bromwich Tyson, Aaron, Ulverston, Lancaster, Joiner. June 8 at 11 at Temperance Hall, Ulver. ston. Park and Mansfield, Barrow-in-Furness Walton, Mary Jane, Kingston-upon-Hull, Brushmaker. June 8 at 3 at offices of Jordeson and Whiteing, County bldgs, Kingston-upon-Hull Watson, William, Shifual, Salop, Moulder. June 3 at 4.30 at Tweedale Inn, Madeley White, Edwin Abraham, Chippenham, Wilts, Cooper. June 10 at 12 at offices of Phil lips, Chippenham Wilkinson, John, Whitchurch, Salop, Farmer. June 12 at 1 at Crown Hotel, Nantwich. Wilson, Thomas, and Charles Henry Wilson, Leeds, Confectioners. June 7 at 3 at office TUESDAY, May 30, 1882. Ball, Thomas, Newark-upon-Trent, Nottingham, Grocer. June 22 at 1 at Ram Inn, Newark-upon-Trent, Bescoby, East Retford Balson, Thomas Halse, Poole, Dorset, Grocer. June 9 at 1 at Red Lion Hotel, Salisbury. Trevanion, Poole Barber, William, Liversedge, York, Currier. June 12 at 3 at Queen Hotel, Westgate, Heckmondwike. Mitcheson, Heckmondwike Barden, George, Beckley, Sussex, Blacksmith. June 7 at 11 at offices of Hayles, High st, Rye Barron, Norman, Manchester, Solicitor. June 20 at 11 at offices of Addleshaw and Warburton, Norfolk st, Manchester Beeston, Thomas, Newark-upon-Trent, Nottingham, Currier. June 19 at 3 at offices of Norman, Mdidle pavement, Nottingham Bibby, Sarah, Manchester, Confectioner. June 14 at 3 at 103, Piccadilly. Greaves, Manchester Brook, John, Sampford Courtenay, Devon, Retired Farmer. June 13 at 11 at offices of Hirtzel, Bedford circus, Exeter Brown, Alexander Grieve, Hartlepool, Durham, Provision Dealer. June 9 at 3:30 at offices of Todd and Harrison, Town wall, Hartlepool Bullock, Thomas, Wolverhampton, Stafford, Traveller. June 12 at 12 at offices of Eagleton, Queen st, Wolverhampton Burton, John Wesley, Liverpool, Bookbinder. June 13 at 3 at office of Jones and Pride, North John st, Liverpool Cant, Elijah, Steeple, Essex, Baker. June 7 at 2 at Blue Boar Hotel, Maldon. Jones and Co, Colchester Castiglioni, Louis, Doncaster, Merchant. June 5 at office of Lewis and Lewis, Ely pl, Holborn, in lieu of the place originally named Chambers, Charles, Grange rd, Kentish Town, Grocer. June 14 at 2 at office of Cummins, Union ct, Old Broad st Clark, Robert, Jewin crescent, Jewin st. Ostrich Feather Manufacturer. June 20 at 12 at office of Beard and Sons, Basinghall st Collins, Thomas, Oldbury, Worcester, Licensed Victualler. June 11 at 11 at office of Shakespeare, Church st, Oldbury Constantine, Zephaniah, Bradford, Merchant. June 10 at 10 at 12, Piccadilly, Bradford. Wilkinson, Bradford Conway, Matthew, Shudehill, Manchester, Smallware Merchant. June 16 at 12 at office of Bates and Co, Market st, Manchester Coxen, James, Birmingham, Butcher. June 12 at 11 at office cf Peet, Newhall st, Birmingham Dickinson, William, Upper st, Licensed Victualler. June 26 at 12 at office of Nash and Field, Queen st, Cheapside Dormer, Sarah Ann, Warwick, Hotel Keeper. June 15 at 1 at Bowling Green Hotel, Warwick. Lane Emmerson, Thomas Cant, Stockton on Tees, Auctioneer. Newby and Co, Finkle st, Stockton on Tees June 12 at 11 at office of Evans, Hampden, Brighton, Licensed Victualler. June 12 at 3 at office of Lamb and Evett, Ship st, Brighton Grant, Henry, Eastbourne, Sussex, Coal Merchant. June 9 at 12 at 64a, Terminus rd, Eastbourne. Dearle and Edgeworth, Eastbourne Green, Daniel, Coldharbour in, Brixton, Linen Draper. June 9 at 3 at Guildhall Tavern, Gresham st. Sturt, Southwark chinbrs, Southwark st, Borough Hammond, William, St Leonard's on Sea, Sussex. June 7 at 12 at office of Neve, Norman rd, St Leonard's on Sea Hamnett, John William, Handsworth, Stafford, Stamper. June 12 at 3 at office of Parr and Hayes, Colmore row, Birmingham Harber, George, Ryde, Isle of Wight, Shoemaker. June 2 at 2 at office of Fardell and Dashwood, Market st, Ryde Hartshorne, William, Walsall, Coal Master. June 10 at 11 at office of Baker, Market pl, June 7 at 3 at office of Morley, Willenhall Hayes, Daniel, Crown rd, Fulham, Oil and Colour Man. Cheapside Heywood, Lees, Oldham, Lancaster, General Dealer. June 14 at 3 at Mitre Hotel, Cathedral gates, Manchester. Watson, Oldham Hill, Henry George, King st, Baker st, Licensed Victualler. June 9 at 11 at office cf Lindus and Bicknell, Cheapside Hill, Thomas, Steeple Aston, Oxford, Butcher. June 12 at 11 at the Crown and Cushio Hotel, Chipping Norton. Kilby and Mace, Chipping Norton Hills, John, Horsham, Sussex, Draper. June 11 at 3 at the Bridge House Hotel, London Hollinshead, John, Alsager, Chester, Earthenware Manufacturer. June 14 at 4.30 at the Holmes, Charles, Tunstall, Stafford, Earthenware Manufacturer. June 14 at 4.30 at James, John, Burslem, Stafford, Baker. June 10 at 11 at offices of Welch, Caroline st, Longton Jeffery, Eli, Stanley, near Wakefield, York, Grocer, June 15 at 12.30 at the George Hotel, Wakefield. Foster and Raper Jenkins, Albert Edward, Bristol, Trunk Maker. June 11 at 12 at offices of Mosely, Shannon ct, Corn st, Bristol Johnson, Richard Sheraton, and Thomas Mitchelson Reay, Stockton-on-Tees, Durham, Colliery Owners. June 13 at 2.30 at the Queen Hotel, Zetland rd, Middlesborough. Hoyle and Co, Newcastle-on-Tyne Jolly, James, Wick lane, Victoria pk, Builder. June 14 at 2 at offices of Courtenay and Croome, Gracechurch st Jones, Charles Birmingham, Builder. June 12 at 11 at offices of Rowlands, Colmore row, Birmingham Kay, John, Preston, Lancaster, Hair Dresser. June 12 at 12 at offices of Charnley, Winckley st, Preston Lawley, James, Bilston, Stafford, out of business. June 10 at 11 at the Globe Hotel, Mount Pleasant, Bilston. Fellows, Bilston Little, James, Reading, Berks, Auctioneer. June 10 at 3 at offices of Newman, Friar st, Reading Lord, Charles, Edmond, Twerton-on-Avon, Somerset. June 15 at 11 at No. 11, Twerton East, Twerton-on-Avon Machin, Stephen, Stockton-on-Tees, General Dealer. June 6 at 11 at offices of Draper, Finkle st, Stockton-on-Tees Marfleet, William Benjamin, Finchley, Grocer. June 14 at 3 at offices of Cook and Smith, Adelaide bldgs, London Bridge. Tanner Morrow, Nicholas, Sadberge, near Darlington, Hay Dealer. June 12 at 11 at offices of Moy, William, Brighton, Fruiterer. June 8 at 12 at offices of Maynard, North st, SCHWEITZER'S COCOATINA, Arti-Dyspeptic Cocoa or Chocolate Powder. Guaranteed Fure Soluble Cocoa of the Finest Quality, with the excess of fat extracted. The Faculty pronounce it "the most nutritious, perfectly digestible beverage for Breakfast, Luncheon, or Supper, and invaluable for Invalids and Children." Highly commended by the entire Medical Press. Being without sugar, spice, or other admixture, it suits all palates, keeps better in all climates, and is four times the strength of cocoas THICKENED yet WEAKENED with starch, &c., and IN REALITY CHEAPER than such Mixtures. Made instantaneously with boiling water, a teaspoonful to a Breakfast Cup, costing less than a halfpenny. COCOATINA A LA VANILLE is the most delicate, digestible, cheapest Manilla Chocolate, and may be taken when richer chocolate is prohibited. In tin packets at 1s. 6d., 38., 58. 6d., &c., by Chemists and Grocers. Charities on Special Terms by the Sole Proprietors, H. SCHWEITZER & CO 10, Adam-strect, London, W.C. Mynn, John, St Leonard's-on-Sea, Sussex, Boot Dealer. June 8 at 3 at offices of Neve, of Woosnam, the Bank, Newtown of Poole, 83, Gresham st, in lieu of the place originally named Partridge, Sarah Ann, HuddersfiJld, York, Milliner. June 12 at 3 at office of Booth, John William st, Huddersfield Pepper, William, Newington Causeway, Southwark. Brush Maker. June 13 at 4 at office of Clulow, Gracechurch st Perry, Thomas, Bursledon, Southampton, Farmer. June 8 at 12 at office of Guy, Albion ter, Southampton Pidwell, John Inch, Devonport, Devon, Butcher. June 13 at 12 at office of Sole and Gill, St Aubyn st, Devonport Ricketts, James, Walsall, Stafford, Publican. June 9 at 11.30 at office of Sheldon, Rogers, Charles, Newnham st, Marylebone, no occupation. June 6 at 2 at Masons' Salomos, Mark, Commercial rd, Peckham, Commission Agent. June 8 at 10 at New Seager, William, Leominster, Hereford, Fish Merchant. June 13 at 3 at office of Moore, Corn sq, Leominster Seaman, Robert, Gt Clacton, Essex, Painter. June 12 at 11 at George Hotel, Colches. ter. Sutthery, Clacton-on-Sea Smith, George, Mansfield, Nottingham, Grocer. June 12 at 3 at Midland Hotel, Mans. field. Clifton, Nottingham Stacey, Susannah, Weston-super-Mare, Somerset, Jeweller. June 12 at 2 at office of Horton and Co, Newhall st, Birmingham Stanwix, William, Wakefield, York, Shopkeeper. June 9 at 11 at office of Lake and Lake, Wakefield Tanner, Joseph Baskerville, Worcester, Grocer. st, Worcester June 12 at 11 at office of Tree, High Taylor, Thomas Broadbent, Brymbo, nr Wrexham, Denbigh, Publican. June 14 at 12 at office of Bradley, Hope st, Wrexham Vandenbergh, Julius Arnoldus Ryke, Portsmouth. Hants, Coal Merchant. June 9 at 12.30 at office of Edmunds and Co, Cheapside. Feltham, Portsea Waller, William, Gt Grimsby, Lincoln, Builder. June 13 at 1 at Ship Inn, Pottergate, Gt Grimsby. Turner, Beverley Weale, William, Newport, Salop, Builder. June 17 at 12 at Crewe Arms Hotel, Crewe. Carrane, Wellington Webster, William, Bradford, Butcher. June 14 at 11 at office of Margerison, Swan arcade, Market st, Bradford Wenham, George David, Manchester, Bookseller. June 13 at 3 at office of Lees and Graham, King st, Manchester. Johnson, Manchester Whatmore, William, Hartlebury, Worcester, Farme. June 15 at 3 at office of Thursfield, Swan st, Kidderminster Winkworth, Stephen Kent, Margate, Lieutenant in Military Train Service. June 14 at 12 at office of Sankeys and Co, Castle st, Canterbury ESTABLISHED 1825. HEWETSON, THEXTON, & PEART, MANUFACTURERS AND HOUSE FURNISHERS, 200, 203, and 201, TOTTENHAM COURT ROAD, W. Estimates and Designs submitted free for entirely Furnishing Residences, Chambers, Offices, &c. -PAINTING, DECORATING, & HOUSE REPAIRS. Carved Oak Furniture, Reproductions from Ancient Designs, &c. Bedroom Furniture, including Bedstead and Bedding, from £7 10s. per set. THIRTY LARGE SHOW ROOMS. HEWETSON, THEXTON, & PEART. 200, 203, and 201, Tottenham Court-road, London, W. N.B.-Household Furniture Warehoused or Removed on reasonable terms. 94, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON. Ready May 23, in cloth, price 4s., for cash, post-free,3s. 6d. HORTHAND (Pitman's.)-W. McWIL-BSERVATIONS on the CONVEYANC LIAM, late of Exeter Hall, and Teacher of considerable Experience, continues to give Private Instructionensuring rapid progress-to members of the Legal Profession and others at his own or pupil's residence any evening from 7 o'clock -For particulars, address or apply to 2, Sidmouth-street, W.C. ING and LAW of PROPERTY ACT, and the SOLICITORS' REMUNERATION ACT, 1881. Written specially for Students, showing clearly the effect of each section of the Act on the existing law. By ALBERT GIBSON and ROBERT M'LEAN, Solicitors. Publishers: REEVES & TURNER, 100, Chancery-lane. CURRENT TOPICS. LONDON, JUNE 10, 1882. IN CONSEQUENCE of the absence of Vice-Chancellor HALL from illness all the causes and matters assigned to him have been transferred, by order of court, to Mr. Justice KAY, who will proceed with Vice-Chancellor HALL'S motions, petitions, and adjourned summonses on the usual days, but will sit in his own court. THE LIST of the Appeal Court, published since our last issue, anticipated. It contains 58 appeals from the Chancery Division, 103 from the Queen's Bench Division, 16 from the Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Division, and 9 bankruptcy appeals, making a total of 186 appeals. exhibits an increase in the number of cases which we had not THE APPOINTMENT of Mr. DAY, Q.C., to the vacant judgeship has been a surprise to the profession. His great common sense, ability and experience render it safe to predict that he will make what is known as a very good Nisi Prius judge. There is an impression, however, that, valuable as these qualities are, something more is needed at present on the bench of the High Court, and that it would be well if judges of first instance were selected from members of the bar, distinguished, not merely as able advocates, but also as lawyers of great learning. THE CAUSE LIST of the Chancery Division shows the increase we ventured during last sittings to anticipate. The causes set down before Vice-Chancellor BACON number 93; those before Vice-Chancellor HALL, 101; those before Mr. Justice FRY, 104; those before Mr. Justice KAY, 152; and those before Mr. Justice CHITTY, 186; making a grand total of 636 causes in the Chancery Division. At the commencement of the Easter Sittings there were 615, and a year ago there were only 446. That the existing staff of judges of first instance can adequately deal with this mass of work, in addition to the large amount of interlocutory business which occupies at least two days in each week, appears hopeless, especially as Mr. Justice FRY will be absent for a long time on circuit, and Vice Chancellor HALL is disabled by illness. THE BILL to extend and improve the Middlesex Registry, brought in by Mr. HOPWOOD, to which we referred last week, has been printed; and provides, as we anticipated, that the district shall be divided into sub-districts, and that a separate division of the register shall be kept for each sub-district; also that the index shall be so framed as to furnish references to places as well as to persons, and shall, as far as practicable, be based on the Ordnance Survey, "and shall, as far as practicable, be completed up to the latest date." It is very much to be hoped that this provision will be inserted in the Government Bill. The Bill further provides for the extension of the district of the registry City of London and all parishes and places mentioned in schedules A., B., and C. to the Metropolis Management Act, 1855." We think it questionable whether this proposal is advisable at present; the prejudice against the registry as now organized will lead to strong opposition to the extension of its district, and it would seem to be wiser to postpone such extension until registration and searches have been made more convenient. to the " THE DECISION IN Williams v. Mercier, which was overruled in a somewhat summary and impolite manner by the Court of Appeal (ante, p. 479), was one of those misadventures which now and then occur to judges who have never prepared or professionally perused a marriage settlement. It is perhaps a little difficult to understand how even the "fairly intelligent layman," (to whom an esteemed correspondent was so desirous of submitting the interpretation of a certain provision of the Conveyancing Act) could fail to understand that a provision in a settlement declaring that jewels should belong to the wife for her separate use, must have some little operation on the ownership of the jewels, and their liability to be taken in execution for the debt of the wife the Lord Chief Justice that the jewels declared by the settlement contracted before marriage; and the jury, who were directed by to belong to the wife for her separate use were the property of perplexity as to the meaning of separate use, unless, indeed, they the husband, must have gone home in a state of considerable arrived at the conclusion that the husband, although the owner of his wife's ear-rings, could not wear them. But no doubt something must be allowed for the hurry and bustle of a jury trial. The wonder is that a divisional court should have taken the same view of the operation, or non-operation, of the settlement. As the jewels are stated to have been " alleged to be the separate property of the wife" at the time of the levying of the execution, it does not appear possible that the provision in the settlement can have been overlooked. What, then, can be the view of the judges as to the doctrine of separate use? IT HAS BEEN STATED by the Duke of WESTMINSTER that, by reason of the use of a new brake on the Metropolitan District Railway, many of the leasehold houses in Pimlico, of which he is ground landlord, have been so severely shaken as to be in great danger of falling, and it has been suggested in some quarters that the well-known rule of Hammersmith Railway Company, Apellants; Brand, Respondent (L. R. 4 H. L. 171), that no compensation is recoverable for damage, such as vibration, noise, and smoke, which may arise from the working (as distinct from the construction) of a railway, does not apply to a case where structural damage is caused. No doubt in Brand's case no structural damage was done, and in argument a distinction was drawn of the peers, or the opinions of the judges delivered for the guidbetween structural and other damage, but none of the judgments ance of the House, favour the drawing of any such distinction, and we very greatly doubt whether it is maintainable in principle. It is, however, worth while to mention that the opinion of the majority of the judges was against the ruling in Brand's case, and that Lord CAIRNS emphatically dissented from that judgment. It is material to point out that the Metropolitan (Inner Circle) Completion Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. cxxix.), contains a section expressly drawn to avoid the effect of Brand's case. Section 39 of that Act enacts that "the company shall make proper compensation to the owners for any structural or other injury of the like nature which may, from the execution of the works, or in connection with the railway, result" to certain premises, " either by the lessening of the amount of support which such premises now receive from the soil which must be removed in the execution of such works, or from the vibration or oscillation caused by the working or otherwise [sic] of the said railway," but the section also provides that the company shall not be liable to make compensation for damage not occurring within three years after the railway shall have been completed or open for traffic. The railway not being open, this section has not yet been put into force, and we do not believe that it will have a very extensive application. The principal importance of the clause consists in its forming a precedent for that amendment of the Lands Clauses Act which Brand's case has shown to be so urgently required. As was said by Baron BRAMWELL, when advising the House of Lords in Brand's case (L. R. 4 H. L. at p. 192), "it is absurd to suppose that it can have been intended [by Parliament] that if a house was damaged to the extent of one pound a year by its light and air being diminished, compensation should be given, and that it should not be given when the damage was ten times as great, but was caused by the noise and vibration of the trains." and except in the case of the fast disappearing turnpike roads, no shall as well arrived at a lawful decision." We have reluctantly come to the LORD BRAMWELL has introduced a Bill to extend the jurisdic-ferred upon them," gave it as their opinion that "the auditor tion of justices in quarter sessions to cases of burglary and forgery. It has over and over again been pointed out that many cases of burglary are of a very trumpery description, and are practically undistinguishable from cases of ordinary larceny. Nevertheless, the time of the judges is taken up at assizes by trying them. The same considerations may, perhaps, be said to apply to cases of forgery, though we should have thought that cases of forgery were more frequently of a difficult nature, involving the desirability of a judge's guidance and direction of the jury. Still there may be trumpery and comparatively simple cases of forgery. It is also no doubt the case that there are burglaries and forgeries of greater gravity, or involving more difficulty, which it might be desirable to bring before the judge. It is, therefore, proposed by the Bill to give a discretion to the committing magistrates to commit either to assizes or quarter sessions. The object of the proposed measure is, no doubt, desirable, and in the present deadlock of all legislative business, except that relating to Ireland, it may, perhaps, be thought well to provide for this particular point by a short measure, but we are not altogether satisfied with this piecemeal kind of legislation. The question how far the present arrangements for business, both criminal and civil, could be with advantage modified, so as to economize the time of the judges, is a general question of importance, and should, if possible, be dealt with as a whole. We are not without scruples as to the provision giving the choice of the tribunal to the committing magistrates. Some country gentlemen might be apt to consider quarter sessions a better tribunal than assizes for the transaction of business—viz., the conviction of prisoners who, in their eyes, are always to be presumed guilty. The committing magistrate in the country is a member of the Court of Quarter Sessions, and it seems rather anomalous, when ex hypothesi he is not competent to try a case, to give him a discretion to say whether it is to be tried before him. It seems to us that a reform of the composition of the Court of Quarter Sessions is needed, and that the question of such reform ought to come under discussion with, and necessarily forms part of, any general measure with regard to the re-distribution of criminal business. If competent professional men were the chairmen of quarter sessions, not only could the particular crimes under discussion be handed over to the sessions, but probably other crimes which now occupy the judges at assizes. We see that Lord DERBY, in laying the foundation stone of a new county sessions house at Liverpool lately, discussed this topic. Though he deprecated the abolition of the unpaid magistracy of the country and the substitution of a costly army of stipendiaries, he, nevertheless, felt himself obliged to admit that he had come to the conclusion that the chairman of the sessions ought to be a professional man. That this conclusion should be enunciated in the course of a speech strongly favourable to the system of unpaid magistrates, as a whole, is the more striking. The speaker also connected this topic with the extension of the jurisdiction of the sessions, so as to relieve the judges at assizes. We are not cor cerned at present to discuss the larger question raised by Lord DERBY as to whether all magistrates should be professional men. There are difficulties and disadvantages that might possibly preponderate over the advantages of such a change. With regard to the appointment of professional chairmen of quarter sessions we have so often and so fully expressed our views on that subject, that it is unnecessary to do more than say that we are very glad to find the question brought before the public in a manner favourable to the solution we have always advocated. IT IS ILLEGAL to set up, or even to paint and letter, milestones on a highway without a special statutory authority in that behalf; Friday, was attacked by a stroke of paralysis. His condition has since Vice-Chancellor Hall, while walking home to his house in Bayswater on somewhat improved. such terms, if any," as the judge may think fit. The judge, even ADDITIONAL RENT UPON BREACH OF if not inimical to forfeiture generally, may attach a very different COVENANT. THE decision of the Court of Appeal in Weston v. Managers of the Metropolitan Asylum District (30 W. R. 623) points out to intending lessors a means of securing the performance of covenants of which it is probable they will not be slow to avail themselves. As our readers know, the only leases in which it has hitherto been very usual to reserve an increased rent in case of breach of covenant are agricultural leases, in which it has, in many parts of the country, become a matter of common form to reserve an increased rent for every acre of old grass land which the lessee ploughs up or converts into tillage. Probably the irreparable injury which might formerly, in many cases, be caused to the landlord by the act upon which the increased rent is made pay able, furnishes a sufficient explanation of the introduction of this provision in agricultural leases. It came into vogue at an early period, and is to be found in precedent books published at the close of the seventeenth century, a time when farmers relied much more for the winter food of their cattle upon old meadow hay han they do now, and when, consequently, it was of the utmost importance to the landlord to preserve all the old meadow land. Having once become a common form in farm leases the provision held its place; for a clause in these leases is very much like the sentinel still placed on the spot where the Empress Catherine stationed a sentinel to watch her snowdrops-it retains its place long after the reason for it has disappeared. But for this it is probable that the changes in agricultural arrangements, and the singular doctrine laid down in Woodward v. Gyles (2 Vern. 119), and affirmed in Legh v. Lillie (9 W. R. 55, 6 H. & N. 165)—that (at any rate under the form of provision adopted in those cases), on payment of the increased rent the lessee was at liberty to do the act on the doing of which the increased rent became payable—would have led to the abandonment of the provision. It may be that the first-named decision had some effect in preventing the extension of the provision to other kinds of leases and other acts of waste. But a more potent reason was doubtless that the landlord, until recently, needed no other remedy against breaches of covenant than the summary and effectual remedy given by the proviso for re-entry. Moreover, it seemed doubtful whether the result of the reservation of the additional rent might not be to prevent the operation of the proviso for re-entry. If the result of the reservation was that the lessee, on payment of the additional rent, was at liberty to do the act on which such rent became payable, it seemed to follow that such act could not be a breach of covenant within the proviso for re-entry. This was the point which came up for decision in Weston v. Managers of the Metropolitan Asylum District. A lease contained a covenant by the lessee against carrying on certain trades, and a proviso for re-entry upon breach of any of the covenants in the lease. The reddendum reserved an additional yearly rent in case the lessee should carry on any of the prohibited trades. It was contended that the lessee might carry on the prohibited trades if he paid the additional rent, and that no forfeiture was thereby incurred for breach of covenant; but both the Queen's Bench Division (30 W. R. 459) and the Court of Appeal held that the proviso for re-entry and the reddendum were consistent, and gave the landlord an option, on breach of the covenant referred to in the reddendum, either to re-enter and determine the tenancy, or to demand the additional rent. "No doubt," said Lord Justice Cotton, "there may be covenants in a deed by which a lessee shall not be allowed to do certain acts without paying an additional rent, on payment of which rent he may do those acts. But here the effect of the lease is to give an option to the landlord, in the event of eertain things being done by the tenant, to re-enter; with the alternative, if he prefers it, of continuing the lessee as tenant, in which case the latter is bound to pay an additional rent." We need hardly point out the importance of this decision at the present time. The restriction on forfeiture section of the Conveyancing Act has left the landlord, as regards the operation of the proviso for re-entry in respect of many acts which he may consider very detrimental to his property, at the mercy of judges, who, like a late eminent occupant of the bench, may have the strongest objection to the proviso for re-entry. Relief against forfeiture may now, in all but the excepted cases, be granted "on importance to breaches of covenant to that which the landlord attaches to them. There can be little doubt that when the operation of section 14 of the Conveyancing Act has become known, landlords will instruct their legal advisers to obtain some increased security for the observance of covenants to which they attach special importance. This increased security is to be obtained by the reservation in the reddendum of an increased rent on breach of the covenant, together with the insertion in the lease of a proviso for re-entry on non-payment of any rent reserved in the lease or on breach of any covenant. The additional rent may be made so large as to be practically prohibitory, and so the landlord, in the case of a solvent tenant, will be independent of the proviso for re-entry; the benefit of which, however, he will be able to obtain in case his tenant fails to pay the additional rent when it has become due. The answer to any objection by the lessee to the insertion of the reservation of additional rent is obvious. “If you observe your covenant, you will never have to pay the increased rent." The points to be observed by the practitioner are (1) that the covenant must be framed exactly as if there were no reservation of additional rent on breach of it, and (2) that such reservation must be made in the reddendum, and not, as is sometimes the case, at the end of the covenant. OVERHEAD WIRES. THE Select Committee of the House of Commons appointed to consider the various Electric Lighting Bills introduced in the present session has recommended (inter alia) that all wires necessary for such undertakings should be laid underground. We think that this recommendation will be received with satisfaction, and have no doubt of its ultimate adoption. In the meantime, however, it may be well to consider what are the rights, if any, of the public to protection from the many overhead wires which already cross the streets of London and other towns in every direction. Can anybody prevent these wires being so placed, and, when they are so placed, is there any remedy for injury caused by their fall? With regard to the rights of property, it is well known that land in its legal signification has an indefinite extent upwards. The odd ruling of Lord Ellenborough in Pickering v. Rudd (4 Camp. 219), upon the maxim "cujus est solum ejus est usque ad calum" being cited in an action of trespass for nailing a board on the defendant's fence so as to overhang the plaintiff's own garden, that it was no trespass to interfere with the column of air superincumbent on the close, inasmuch as, if it was, it would follow that an aeronaut was liable to an action of trespass at the suit of the occupier of every field over which his balloon might pass, has never, so far as we are aware, been applied to deprive the owner of the soil of any practical rights. Apart from an Act of Parliament, the old rule is unshaken. We shall see presently that in dealing with overhead wires which it has permitted telegraph companies to establish, the Legislature has by no means lost sight of the rule. But it is well to observe at the outset that when telegraphy had so much advanced in this country as to make it desirable that all telegraph companies should be made subject to a general Act of Parliament framed on the lines of the Companies Clauses and Lands Clauses Consolidation Acts, it was underground, and not overhead, wires that were made the subject of the more stringent precautionary provisions. The Telegraph Act, 1863 (26 & 27 Vict. c. 112), although it authorizes overhead wires in general terms, and provides in general terms-which we will refer to presently-for their safe keeping and repair, has had, no doubt, the effect of multiplying overhead wires by making underground wires more difficult and troublesome to lay down. Thus, it is provided by section 9 that a telegraph company" shall not place a telegraph under any street" within the metropolitan district, or of any city or municipal borough or town corporate, or of any town having a population of thirty thousand inhabitants or upwards (according to the last census), except with the consent of the bodies having the control of the streets within their respective limits, and by section 10 that every underground pipe or pipes shall be so marked as to distinguish it from tubes or pipes of every other company, |
