Page images
[merged small][graphic][merged small][merged small][merged small]

We have now before us the second and concluding volume of this work, and a portly volume it is, of nearly 1,000 pages. The subject with which the book deals is one of the utmost interest and importance, and it is not too high praise to say that the book is wortplg of its subject. The future historian of the “Victorian Era” w find here ready to his hand a vast collection of facts and figures, and the form in which these are presented is attractive as well as instructive.

The present volume falls naturally into two divisions, of which the first deals with certain of the greater subjects of Private Bill Legislation which wero not discussed in the first volume, and the second contains an historical exposition of practice in connection with such legislation. After a chapter relating to Highways, Roads, Bridges, and Ferries, we come to three chapters containing the history of the legislation with respect to the London Water Supply, including an account of the abortive attempts of 1880 and 1-SS4 to put. this matter on a new basis. Then several chapters are devoted to the subject of Local Authorities, one of them being specially appropriated to the Corporation of the City of London. Materials are supplied here for tracing out the history of the much-debated coal duties; the benefits which have accrued to the public from their existence are explained, and it is pointed out that, in the event of the thirteenpenny tax not being renewed in 1889, the corporation's prescriptive right to metage will then again arise. Chapters are also given to the subjects of Insurance and of the Thames Docks.

_The second division of this volume is occupied, as already stated, with the_consideration of the practice, the historical development of which is fully worked out, and the present system is discussed. Various proposals, recent and comparatively old, for the delegation of the work of the Private Bill Committees to judicial, local, or other bodies are investigated, and the conclusion at which the author arrives may be best stated in his own language :—“ Committees do a most useful and necessary work without payment. This work is part of the legislative fimctions of the High Court to which they

elong, performed, it may almost be said, in the presence of Parliament, and subject to immediate check and revision from either branch of the Legislature. Committees are no more infallible than Parliament itself is. But suitors trust them, recognize their oompetence, and are satisfied with a right of appeal and a second hearing. The interests of suitors, however, are small in comparison with the public interests affected by this jurisdiction. For the Imperial Parliament to discontinue its ancient Parliamentary tribunals, now reformed and oheap_ened_, and delegate legislative functions, wholly

or partially, to any inferior authority, would surely be a lamentable abandonment both of power and of duty."

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

in consecutive order. An example will give a better idea of the nature of the book than any amount of description. We take, at haphazard, the definition of Injuriri at p. 668 :—

“Injurz'a, in the narrower sense, is every intentional and illegal violation of honour—i.e , the whole personality of another," and this definition is illustrated by the following passages :—

“ Genev-aliter injuria dicitur omne quod nonjure fit ; apecialiter alias

[ocr errors]

I7l_]U7‘lLl ea afectu facientis consistit. Itaque pati quis injuririm, cti'anm'no1isenti'at, potest; facere nemo, m'u' qui scit se injuriam facerc, etimnsi maciat, cuifaciat.”

Now, we think that it would be far more instructive, more interesting, and more intelligible for the average student, who wanted to understand the meaning of i'm'uri'a in Roman law, to sit down and read Digest 47, 10, which would not take him very long, than a series of clippings like the foregoing. The example above, however, is more intelligible and readable than a good many which we have come across, but which are too long for quotation. One of the most curious results of the clipping process which we have found is on page 665, where the following passage occurs under the description of the action for Damnum Injuria D itum, given by the Lex Aquilia:—“ In heredem vol oeteros lmec aciio non dabitur, cum sit pccnalia, nisi forte ear rlamno locuplelior heres factus sit." After reading which, if the student is not duly impressed with the logical beauty of Roman law we do not know what will impress him.


Bsaxaii’s TRADE AND FINANCE Aiviroan, 1886-7. Efliiigham Wilson.

A considerable amount of information is here collected, in a moderate compass and in a readable shape, on a large variety of topics. The first section of the book, which is devoted to the Money Market, deals with such matters as the Bank of England, the price of gold, financial panics, and so on. The Silver Question has asection to itself, in which bimctallism and the purchasin power of the rupee find a place. Foreign Exchanges and the Stock Exfiiange are also discussed, and a mass of statistics is presented bearing upon English, American, and Indian railways, and the commercial staples of wool, iron, coal. tin, copper, lead, petroleum, and tea, as well as on population. But the most important and, from a legal point of view, the most interesting topic comprised in the work is the English Lind Question, followed by some details on the agricultural industries. Upon the English Land Question the elementary materials necessary for forming a judgment appear to be supplied, and are, on the whole. fairly stated. The weakness of the theories as to “ unearned incremeiit" is made clear by the authority of the late Professor Fawcett, and the objections to Mr. Jesse Collings‘ Allotments and Small Holdings _ Bill are forcibly stated. With respect to the movement for the so-called enfranchisement of leaseholds the judgment of the compilers appear to be in suspense; they do not appear to see the full force of the objections to transferring one man’s property to another by enabling the resent leaseholder to insist on com ulsorily purchasing the freehold) reversion at a _price arbitrarily fixed) by some external authority, nor to be fully alive to the very different positions which would be created if all!’ law in this direction were confined to future leases, in which 0459 people would be able to act with their eyes open, and there would not be the same reason for complaint.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]
[merged small][graphic][merged small]

CORRESPONDENCE. THE LA\V'S DELAY. [T0 the Editor of the Solicitors’ Journal.]

Sir,—We venture to call attention through your columns to the following facts, which seem to us to point to something radically wrong in the arrangements for the administration of justice :

In a trust for which we are the solicitors there isa question on the construction of a will, and the decision of the court was desired upon the point. Some of the beneficiaries, therefore, took out an originating summons, returnable in the early part of Jlay lust, in chambers. One aflidavit verifying the facts was read, and the matter was adjourned into co1u't. The case was at once inserted in the list, classes II. and III., and 1's still awaiting hearing.

It is right to mention that the judge to whose court the case was originally attached died, and another judge took it over, with others, hut, even allowing a delay of three weeks for the transfer, we think this instance of delay—-simply, it would appear, by reason of want of judge power—is a disgrace to our civilization. There are other cases in the same predicament, and it seems to us that to get ovgr it (and avoid similar blocks in future) there should be more ]Il ges.

It would be infinitely better for one judge, or even two, to be idle for a short time each sittings than to impose upon suitors such unconscionable delay.

Our case, when it does come on, will not, we suppose, occupy more than half-an-hour, yet it has been standing in the list ready for hearing since May lust. SOLICITORS T0 ran TRUSTEES.


The annual meeting of this society was held on the 22nd of December in the hall of the society, Lincoln's-inn-buildings, Bowlalley-lane. The president, Mr. J. J. Thomey, occupied the chair, and there was a large attendance of members. The president moved, and Mr. T. Priestman (vice-president) seconded, the adoption of the report, which had been printed and distributed amongst the members. The report shewed that there were now 92 members of the society, and that was the largest number the society ever contained. It dealt with the action of the council with respect to the several Bills which had been introduced into Parliament affecting the interest of the profession and the public, and reviewed the effect of some important and unexpected decisions of the courts of appeal ui reference to mortgages, bills of sale, and the appointment of a receiver. Regret was expressed at the difliculties placed by the authorities in the way of improving the practice and the procedure, and so extending the usefulness, of the Borough Court of Record, and concluded with a reference to the proceedings at the annual provincial meeting of the IncorPoi-atcd L_aw Society of the United Kingdom at York in October last, on the occasion of the centenary of the Yorkshire Law Society, which Mr. Thorney, Mr. Priestman, Mr. J. T. Woodhouse, Sir Albert Rollit, and Mr. C. F. Shackles attended from the Hull Law Society. A vote of thanks liavmg been passed to the retiring oificers and council was fwknowledged by Mr. Thorney ; on the motion of Mr. J . PTBYIB-Cook, seconded by Mr. Birks, a special vote of thanks was recorded to _the retiring secretory, Mr. J . T. \Voodhousc, for his valuable services to the society in that capacity for eight years; and in floknowledging the vote Mr. \Voodhonse expressed his satisfaction that the society was now in such a prosperous condition. Since he first took oiIic_e the number of members had, by the efiorts of successive presidents, and by the increasing advantages the society °fi"°fl. doubled; it had become incorporated, had a habitation and PYBUJIBEB of its own, and a very valuable and much improved library; it had exercised considerable influence on the proceedings of the chief society In London, and done very valuable work for the profession locally. The Olllcers and council appointed for the ensuing year were as follows :—President, Mr. T. Priestman; vice-president, Mr. J. T. Woodhonse; hon. “°°1t"Y, M11 C. Lambert; hon. treasurer, Mr. J. Allen Jackson; “110. together with the following, form the council :—Mr. J . K. Thorncy ‘(fix-president). Mr. E. Laverack, Mr. H. Birks, Mr. A. M. Jackson, Mr.

01111 Travis-Cook, Mr. T. Farrell, and Sir Albert Rollit, M.P. The


auditors re-elected were Messrs. C. E. Gresham and B. H. \Vinter. The meeting then proceeded to discuss several motions, of which notice had been given, relating to matters of professional interest.


Mr. Joiin BRADLEY Drsn, barrister, has been appointed Conveyancing Counsel to the Treasury in succession to the Hon. Robert Collier, who has succeeded to the peerage as second Lord Monkswell. Mr. Dyne is the eldest son of the Rev. John Bradley Dyne, D.D., formerly head master of Highgate School, and was born in 1839. He was educated at Eton and he was formerly fellow of King's College, Cambridge. He obtained the Bell Scholarship in 1860, and he graduated in the first class of the classical tripos in 1863. He was called to the bar at Lincolifs-inn in Michaelmas Term, 1866, and practices in the Chancery Division. Mr. Dyne was tutor in the law of real and personal property at the Inns of Court from 1873 till 1876.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][graphic][merged small]


D te APPEAL Couar APPEAL COURT Mr. Justice Mr. J ustiee “ ' No. 1. No. 2. KAY. CHI‘I'1'Y. Mon. Jan. 10 Mr. ‘Vmd Mr. King Mr. Jackson Mr. Pcmberton Tuesday 11 King Ward . Koo (Jlowcs Wednesday 12 Clowes King Jackson Pemberton Thu.rsday.. 13 Pemberton Ward Koo Clowes Fri.,Jan.... 14 Koo King Jackson Peinberton Saturday... 15 Jackson \Vard Koo Clowes Mr. Justice Mr. Justice Mr. Justice N ORTK. Srmnmo. KBKEWICH. Monday, January 10 Mr. Beal Mr. Leach Mr. Carrington Tuesday ................... .. 11 Pugh Godfrey Lavie Wednesday ................ .. 12 Beal Leach Carrington Thursday ......... .... .. 13 Pugh Godfrey Lavie Frida .. .................... .. 14 Beal Leach Oarrington Saturday ................ .. 15 Pugh Godfrey Lavie

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][graphic][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Any cause intended to be heard as s. short cause must be so marked in the cause-book at least one clear day before the same can be put in the paper to be so heard, and the necessary papers must be left in court with thejndge's officer the day before the cause is to be put in the paper.

[ocr errors][graphic]
[ocr errors][merged small]

Wsdnsdsy.. 6...Htna, adj lumns k gen pa

Any cause intended to be heard as a shoot cause must be so marked in the cause book at least one_ clear day before the same can be put in the paper to be so heard, and the necessary papers must be left in court with the judrgaes oflicer the day before the cause is to put into the paper.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Any cause intended to be heard as a short cause must be so marked in the cause

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]

be left iii court with the judge's otlicer the day before the cause is to be put in the paper.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Wednesday 6..:Mots. adj. sumns. 8: gen. pa Any cause intended to be heard as a short

cause must be so marked in the cause book at least one clear day before the same can be put iii the paper to be so heard, and the neccs._sary papers must be left in court with the ]l1(l,*.{8'B otiicer the day before the cause is to be put into the paper.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][graphic][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

SPECIAL No'rics.—Qneen'e Bench Final Appeals in Court L, and Chan09Y) appeals (General Lie!) in Court lI., will be taken on the usual days dllflllfi

il-try Sittings. Queen's Bench Interlocntory Appeals in Court 1., and Chancery Interlocutory Appeals in Court Il., will be taken on the first da of the Sittints, and afterwards as nsnal, every Wednesday, during the Sittings. Bankrnpw! APP°‘l' also, as usual, on Fridays in Court I. Appeals from the Lancaster Palatine Court (ii any), which have been Fwd over in the General List, will be taken in Court II. on Thursday, JIIIIIIPY 13th, and again on the first Thursday in the following months of Fe mil’! md March, namely :—Tnnrsday, February 3rd, and Thursday, March 3rd.

The Admiralty Appeals (with Assessors) will be taken in Court I. on ill!‘ t° be specially appointed by the court.

Arrests ron Hiisnmc. (Set down to Saturday, January let, inclusive.)


[ocr errors]
[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[merged small][graphic]

jdizt of Mr Justice Butt (sitting as an additional Judge of the Chan Div) dated 25 May, 1883 May 28

In re F Trower, deo Kemble v Trower Young (trustee) v Trower app oi’ dits from refusal of Mr J ustice Kay to vary Chief Clerk's certificate, dated 13 May, 1886 June 2

In re Crawturd’s Settlement Trusts and In re E L Crawiurd’s Will and 10 & ll Vict c 96 app of Thos Thring and ors from order of Mr Justice Chitty, dated 6 May, 886 June 26 (S O Feb 1)

The Ladywel Mining Co v Huirgons app of plf Co from judgt of Mr Justice Stirling, dated 7 July, 1886 July 16

The La ywell Mining t‘o v Brookea app of pit Cc from judgt of Mr Justice Stirling, dated 7 July, I886 J uly I5 (security ordered Nov 24)

In re J Whitaker, decd Christian v Whitaker app of pits from ord of V C Bacon at Chambers, dated 18 June, 1886 July 15

In re Contract for sale of rral estate made between Henry Harvey and Arthur Garrard, dated 7 Jan, 1886, and V & P Act, I874 app of Hecry Harvey from ord of V C Bacoi, dated 2 July, 1886 July 20

In re Isaac Evans, the younger, deo Davies v Evans app of the Garston and Portland Cement Co from ord of Mr Justice Kay, dated 8 July, i886


In re W Sugden, deo Hirst v Su;:d_en app of the Halifax Commercial Banking Co from refusal of Mr Justice Chitty to vary Chief Clerk's certificate, dated 2 July, 1886 July 26

In re Robert Smith, dec Watts v Watts app of defts from part of order ct‘ Mr Justice Kay on originating sumns, dated 3 July, 1886 July 27

In re T Price, the elder, deo Price v Gregory app of deft Horatio Gregory grim iudgt of Mr Justice Kay on originating sumns, dated 7 July, 1886

y 27

In r_e Thomas Williamson, deo Gray v Williamson app of deit Rebecca gtaligsmson from order of V C Bacon on fur (DD, dated 12 April, I886

In re T_H Whorwood, dec Ogle v Lord Sherbarne app of deft Lord Sherborue from judgt of Mr Justice North, dated 28 J une, 1886 July 29

In re an Appln of Selah R~eve Van Duzsr, trading as Reeve Sr Co, for registration of Trade Mark No. 7509 & 47510 and Patents, Designs, &c, Act, 1883 app of Board of Trade from order of V C Bacon dated 9 July 1886 July 29

In re an Appln of Messrs Leaf, Sons & Co for registration of Trade Mark No 6i,l4l, and Patent &c Act I883 app of Board of Trade & aur from order of Xrdiirliacon, dated July 30, 1886, directing registration Aug 23 (advanced by

In re The New City Constitutional Club Cold app of Otficial Liquidator from order of Mr Justice Kay dated 7 8: 22 July, 1886 Aug 4

Divorce Icgham. orwse S_ac_hs, petnr, v Sachs, respt app of petnr from decree of Mr J ustice Butt dismissing petn for declaration of nullity of marriage, date d _i3 July, i886 Aug 6 (S O with liberty to restore)

Vwswv !'trond' app of plt from judgt of Mr. Justice Chitty, dated 17 March 1886 Aug 6 (security ordered Nov 3)

In re N. Ccrseilis, dec Lawton v Elves app of defts from order of Mr. Justice Kay, dated 23 June, 1886 Aug 6

In re Mary Harmon, deo Daubeny v Harrison app of defts C J Harrison & ors from order of V C Bacon, dated I5 July 1886 Aug 7

Rawson v Minahull app of pit from Mr Justice Chitty dated 7 July 1886 Aug 9

In re Vincent, dec Vincent v Vincent app of pit from judgt of Mr Justice S.irlln8‘,_ 14 July, I886 Aug 10

Rust v Victoria Graving Dock Co id and London 8: St Katharine Docks Co app of defts from orders of Mr Justice Chlltty on applns to set aside referee's

M::g°2» déltid lg Jialy, l886R Aug ll

u o on on errv v us '

2, June, 1886 Aug 1.3 sell app of pit from judgt oi V C Bacon, datsi

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

The Eglinton Chemical Co id v The Yorkshire Tannery & Boo‘. Manufactcry ld app of deft from judgt of Baron Pollock at trial June 23

Eastern Steamship Co id v H R Robertson (l‘he Mersey Forge ld 3rd partyLivsrpooi D R) app of the Mersey Forge id fr rm juigt of Mr J istice Denman at tr‘al without a j u at Liverpool J uue 25

Hull, Bsrnsley & West RidingrJuuc Ry & Dock C-i v Yorkshire and Derbyshire Coal 8: Iron Cc id app of deft Co from judgt of Mr Justice Wills at trial witho it -i jury at Leeds June 30

Earl of Belfast v Horne app of pit from j udgt of Baron Pollock at trial without a jury in Middlesex J uue 30 (security ordered)

B6l'liIfig8JV ‘The Man On Insce Co id app of pit from judgt of Baron Pollock at ti ~i I1 y I

Picker v The London 8c County Banking Co id app of defts from judgt of Mr Justice A L Smith at trial in Middlesex July 8

Stuart v Bigland 8: Co app of deft Co from judgt of Mr Justice Field at trial without a jury in Middlesex July 12

Christian v Payne app of deft from j udgt of Mr J ustice Msthew at trial without a jury in Middieeex July 14

Thomas v Quartermaiue (Q, B Crown Side) app of pits from Justices \Vills and Granth -m reversing judgt of Jutige of County Court July 15

Ho'den v Vestry of St. Mary, Islington (Q B Crown Side) app of Hariph Htilden from judgt of J usticas Hawkins and Day on app from magistrates Ju y 16

Parsons v Dewsbnry and anr (interpleader) app of deft F G Clarke from judgt of Baron Huddleston at trial at Lewes July 17

Ibberson & ore v Neck app of its from Justices Wills and Grantham -action tried by Baron Huddlseten in Middlesex July 20

Mann & ore v Kirkwood 8: Singer's Sewing Machine Co id app of deft Kirkwood from judgt of Mr Justice A L Smith at trial without a jury at Carlisie July 20 (security orderei)

Hntt v Shaw app of pit from judgt of Mr Justice Hawkins at trial in Middlesex

July 20 Hockey v Evans & aur app of dtts from juigt of the Master of the Rilis at trial without a jury in Miidlssex July 2i ( To be continued.)

[blocks in formation]

Before Mr. Jus ice KAY.
Causes for Trial (with witnesses and
without witnesses).
Lewis v James act wits
In re Meyrick Hartmann Gillet‘. v
Lowndes act (Easter Sittings)

Winter v Ind Coope 8: Co act wits
Hotson v Furnesi act wits

Hobson v Dsrtieid Main Coal Cc act


Mor an v Arnison act

Muliern v Bell act wits pt hd

In re Fox F earn v Morgan act

In re Tunnicliife Wright v Wardle

act wits

BirdvAndrew act wits

Cresswell v Davidson act wits
Chautlourierv Ghent act wits
Buckle v B iswell act wits

Coates & Co v Reed, Bros, & Co act

\Vhitaker v Barnard act
Atkins's Filter, &c, Cc v Lipscombe &
Co act wits

In re Pindar, Pindar v Pindar act
Skinner v Lingdon act

Ciabon v Hutchinson act and m f j
Russell v Davies act
LowthervCurwen act wits

Gower v Gower act wits

Whoiley v Heslop m i j

Kirby v Freeman act wits

Gosling v Gosling act

Tompsettv Heat act wits

Besson vFcuntaine act wits Hayward Bros v Lely and anr act


[ocr errors]

General Auction Estate, &c, Co ii v Wright act

In re Snelling Beeching v Suelling act wits

Horsiallv Wood act wits

Mason v Westoby act

Lee v Reed Reed v Lee act wits

Lelasseur v \Voodward act wits

In re Stuart Mansion House Chmbrs vStuart act

Mi-Quads v Davison m fj

Ginsbingv Randell act wits

Fletch.rv Chatfleld act wits

Tough v Tough mfj

Native Guano Co id v Sewage Marine Cold act wits

Chrystal v Simpson act wits

R-rbinsonv Adams art wits

Rcbinsonv Halder act wits

In re Wilson Wilson v Dawson act wits

Venn v Hendriks act wits _

Russell v Lamb act and mt J wits

Blair vDeakin act wits

Eden v Deakin act wits

[graphic][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][graphic][ocr errors]

In re Butler Williams v Butler act, wits

Carter v Cox act wits

Earl Beauchamp v Hammack act
Telfer v Telfer act wits

Bird v Hume act

Bird 8: anr v Hume act

Hine v Bywater act wits

McManns v Cooke act wits

Jones v Levene act wits

Williams v Oxley act

Landergan v Feast act wits

Eardley v Knight act

Magnus v Queensland National Bank

act, wits

Elmore v Pirrie act wits

Atkinson v Same act wits

Tibble v Liquorish act wits

In re Earl of Aylesford’s Estate Acts

Machell v Earl Poulett act

Denman v Leach act, wits

Benson v Wilson act

Oliver v Nash act wits

Ward v Chapman act wits

\Vard v Chapman act wits

Cave v Niblett act wits

Webster, Bart v Southey act wits
Pugh v Salmon act wits

Sharp v Brown act

Sharp v McHeniy act

Jelly v Cooper m fj wits

Rowclifle v Longford Wire Iron &c Co

act wits Anglo-American Brush &c Co v Urompton act

Sharp v Allen act wits

Harris v N ewitt act wits

Evans v Benyon act wits

Armitage v Bishop of Manchester act In ref Bond Big wood v Bond act 8:


J Badart v Smith act wits WetmorevRicketts act wits Humphreysv Ratfety act wits Parsons vCotterill act wits Mt-Donald v Towerzsy act wits Denney v Willis m f j (short) Hsrrisonv Spitzlsy act wits British Equitable, &c, Co v Musgrove act WilliamsvKayler adj snmns wits In re Elardbottls Hardbcttle v Hardbottle act wits Pettyv Daniel act wits In re Paddison Morris v. Paddison act wits

In re Horwocd Horwocd v Paddison ac

De Bensuade v Wood act wits

Eisman v Scholes act and m f j

In re St John St John v St John act and snmns wits

Hancock v Wyatt act

Hawkes v Curtice

In re Shuttleworth Briggs v Shuttleworth m f j (short)

Joy v Renner act wits

McBryde v Dover act wits

Davy v Barnett m fj

Owen v Roberts act

N ewsome v Hill act wits

Further Considerations.

In re Docwra Docwra v Faith fur con and sumns

Beadnall v Ayre fur con

In re Oliver Jarman v Salkeld fur con

In re Angus Chnrchman v Churchman fur con

In re Newman Newman v Baker fur con & sumns

Phillips v Andrews fur con

Reid v La‘ng fur ton & sumns to vary

In re Swift Swift v Swift fur con

Walker v Poole Poole v \Vslker fur con

Adjourned Summonses.

In re Bernard's Will Barnard v \Vhite

In re Bradbrook’s Estate Lock v Willis

In re Duke's Estate Thomas v Duke

In re Speer 8.: Trade Marks Act

In re Brackenbury Chittenden v Wood

In re Browne Anderson v Browne

Expte Mayor, &c, of London In re Met & Dist Ry Act, 1879, &c, and Land Clauses Act

In re Courtier Coles v Courtier

In re Newman Newman v Baker

Goodall v Pemberton, and motn in Pemberton v Goodall

[ocr errors]

In re Duflield Masters v Tabrum
In re Curtis & Be‘its, Solicitors (mm)
In re Jovanseon Blackmore v J ovans
Howell v Price
Republic of Peru v Dreyfus Bros & Co
Austin v Davids
In re Skinner Cairney v Skinner
In re Messing Elmes v Dain
In re Silkstone, &:i, C0, & C0’! A0!!!
In re Hassells's Estate (No 1) Harsslls
v Hunt
In re Smyth Crotch v Bishop
In re Merricks Dixon v Johnson
In re Foster Foster v Dixon
In re Coward Coward v Lar_kman
In re Manning Walton v Bishop
Clongh v Cure
Austin v Davids
In re Courtier Coles v Courtier
In re Bourne Rymer v Harpley
In re Stoea Mangles v Marigles
In re Harvey Harvey v Roberts
In re Clarke Coome v Carter
Native Guano Co. ld. v Sewage Manure
Co ld
Before Mr. Justice CHITTY.
Causes for Trial (with witnesses)
Albery v Broadbent m fj pt hd
wits by order
Le Blond v Curtis act set down by ord
Randall v New Crosi Public Hall Co,
lmd, New Cross Public Hall Co, lmd,
v Randall, Morton v Randall claim
and counter-claim

[ocr errors]


Baroness Wenlock v Ryder ac‘; (transferred froni Q B Div)

Beddington v Atlee act

Saunders v Potter Potter v Saunders act and counter claim

Murray v Tuson ac:

Hart v Beltesworth act

Askew v Browne act

Brough v Dando act

Swann v Mnrr act

Bralsford v Patton act

Higgins v Hill act

Hamming, orwse Hall v Fielden issue for trial

Potter v Dndeney In re J as Potter, dec In re E Stapley, dec In re Jno Potter Potter v Dudeney cons acts

Collison v Hingstcn act

Stuckey's Banking Co v Ponsford

Scott v Milback 1885 S 3,028 act Sxott v Milbank I885 S 3,093 act

In re Witherden, dec Bcilford v Witherden act

Moseley v Victoria Rubber Co act

Grummant v Robbins act & m I j

Burnham v Irvine act

Belfrage v Lindsay act

Kelly v Kelly act

\Vood v Harris a

Ehrlich v Ihlee & anr act

Whitaker v Jeakes act

Sharp v Gooddy, Cripps & Sons, II B013


ct James v Pearless act (S O Mar I) Attorney-Gen v Anderson Anderson v Hawkins claim and counter claim A G Kurtz S: Co v Peter Spence & for ib

[ocr errors]

Sons m f j (treated as action trial, by order)

Johnstone v Newfoundland Guano ld act

Bean v Dawson act

Gardner v Titley act

Hope-Jobnstone v Jervis act

Stevens v Pares act

Gould v Gould act

Green v Edwards act

In re Tinkle-, dec Lloyd v Allen

Redford v Shoppe act

Anderson v Patent Oxonite Co & ors

act & m fj agains; deft R R Vizier Turner v Tymin act

[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]

Hobbs v Wayet act

Eccleston v Eccleston act

Leith v Cooke act

Rait & Gardiner v Dry Dicks Corpu of London ld act _

Morgan v Harmer m f j with cross examination on sill iavits

Smith v McJannet act

In re Roser dec Roser v Featherstone act

Holt 8: ors v Duke Sr ors act

Norman Oakley & Co v Beauchamp fur con after Oificial Receivsr’s Report & trial of counter claim (with wigs) reserved by order of Nov 28 IS

London & Westminster Bk Id v Turquand & ors act

Atkinson on behalf 8:: v De J eanson Hugelmin on behalf &c v Atkinson claim and counter cl aim with snmns In re Honduras Inter- Oceanic Ry Co (peto) by order

Hammersley v Hsmmersley 8: ors act

Alexander v London Founders! Asso: act

Hargreaves v Trustee of Massey and Hargreaves act

Hall v Palmer act

Williams v Neath Canal Navgn Proprietors Neath Canal Navgn Proprietors v Williams claim & counter claim

Wearing v Pnrkiss act

Boyd v Patrick act

Ashley v Drew act

Lichfield v Simmons act

Coots v Ingram act

Wenham Co. Id v May & Co act

Edison & Swan United Electric Light Cold v Shippey Bras act

London Taverns Co ld v Worlev act

Duke of Northumberland v Biwman act

Hards v Bragg act

Smith v Taverner act

Brinton v Hewlett Glading v Brinton claim & counter claim

Tristam v Eld act

Randall v Evans act & mtn for jndgt

In re Moone, dec M )0ll6 v MOH18 act

Condy Sc Mitchell, Id, v Taylor, &c, Co ld act

Non-witness Causes, Adjourned Summonses and Special Cases. Penon v Cuttleld m f j

[ocr errors]

bour’s claim) adj smns (S O Feb I)

Bergheiin v Hornsea Pier Co adj smns to dismiss action by contra itor

In re J Weedon's Estate Weedon v Lengworthy org smns Ex pte will tiur-ts (balance of share)

In re F Sykes’s Estate Sykes v Sykes adj smns Ex pte plt (review taxn) In re E T St John's Estate St John v St John originating sumns (con

struction ot settlement)

In re D Tidey’s Estate Brooks v Tidey adj sums Ex parte Plt (payment into court)

In re Drake S: Piikington, Solicitors,

.Hnddsrsfleld Ex parts Pit adj sumns (review taxation)

In re Thos Wilson’s Estate Dawson v Wilson adj sumns (charge as real estate)

In re Stogdon, a solicitor Ex parte Baker & Wife adj smns (for delivery of bill)

Ex parte School Board for London and Fowler's Trustees (claim of trustees for sale) adj appln from Chmbrs by ord of March 29

Exors of Metzler v Chappell originating smns (for working out accounts)

In re Jno Lyon's Deed Poll Dixon v Roberts adj smns (o.-d 55)

In re Gt'lfiItl18'S Settlement 8: S L Act Gritliths v Griiiiths a"j smns (construction)

In re_Grey’s Brewery, Id adj smns (review taxation)

In re J Snelling, dec Foster v Matthew adj smns (adm legacies)

In re Jos Davies’s Settlement Trusts

StoughtonvFagg adj smns (trust for sale)

Stir-tin v Sturges sp c
In re Northumberland Avenue Hotel

[subsumed][ocr errors][graphic][ocr errors][graphic][ocr errors][graphic]
« PreviousContinue »