Page images
PDF
[graphic][ocr errors]
[graphic]

haviiig sold L. House, she wished to make the following alterations_in her legacies. She then made a fresh list of legacies, the total of _wliich amounted to £1,969, and she added, “Should there any residue it is to be divided as iuy executors think best." The testatrix had no real estate besides L I t was admitted that the gift of residue in the codicil was void for uncertainty; but the question was whether it had the effect of revoking the gift of residue in the will. And there was the further question whether the gift of residue contained in the will operated to pass the real estato. N. appeared and disclaimed any interest under the agreernent.

Non-rii, J ., held that the residuary gift in the will was not revoked by the codicil, and that it did not include the real estate.—Cocssizi., WillisBund; B. B. Itnoerr; Inyle Joyce ,' W. G. Fellows. SOLICITORS, Rye, Eyre, Q Willougliby; Hare Q Co.

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

This was an originating summons raising the question whether, on the true construction of a will, a class of persons beneficially interested took pm" /itirpn or par cnpita. The members of the class were ascertained. The plaintiff was one oi the class whose interest it was to support the stirpital construction. The defendants were the executors of the will, one of them being also a member of the class interested in supporting the other construction. The summons had not been served on anyone else, and the question arose whether all the parties interested were sufficiently represented.

Noimi, J., said that, all the persons interested being ascertained, he could not, under rule 32 of order 16, appoint the persons who were before the court to represent the two divisions of the class. In such a case the proper course was to serve the summons on the executors only in the first instance, and then to apply in chambers to ascertain who the persons interested were, and for directions who should be served.

In the present case the difllculty was removed by the counsel who appeared for the plaintiff, and the defendants being instructed on behalf of the other persons interest/ed.—Coussiir., Everilt, Q,.C., and Arc/l~olI,~ Coggon, Q,.C., and 1-I. B. Howard. SOLICITORS, Arc/rollgr Cu/I-ell; Ri'i~in_r/ton §~ s.

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

The plaintiff was the promoter of ii Bill in Parliament to authorize the abandonment of certain tramways. A petition against the Bill was presented by the Skegness and St. Leonards' Tramway Co. The defendants were two directors of that company. The Committee of the House of Coinmons, before whom the Bill came, reported, under section 2 of the Private Bill Costs Act (28 Vict. c. 27), that the promoter had been vexatiously subjected to expense in the promotion of the Bill by the opposition of the defendants, petitioners against the Bill, and that he was_ entitled to recover costs from them. The taxing officer of the House having taxed the cos_t-s_and given his certificate under section 3, the pla1n_tiff_ issued the writ in this action under section 5, which allows such a plaintiff to sign judgment summarily. The defendants appeared to the Writ and delivered a defence, in which they denied that the Committee had jurisdiction to order them to pay the costs. Application was mode on behalf of the plaintiff to the proper officer of the court to sign j udgment for the amount claimed. He refused, but ultimately the Court of Appeal allowed the plaintiff to sign judgment, stating, however, that it would still be open to the defendants to move to set aside the judgment fonts, p. 1_4l, 35 \V. R. 201, 18 Q. D. 3Q3). The defendants accordingly applied at chambers to set aside the judgment and for leave to put in a defence. Huddleston, B., referred the matter to the court.

Tun Coca-r refused the application. Lord Comiiiinoa, C.J., said it was admitted and it had been found by the Court of Appeal that up to the original application sign judgment everything had been done by the plaintiff with regularity. The defendants, on the other hand, had not acted in the way in which it had been suggested by the Court of Appeal that they might have acted in opposition to the action. The Com-1; of _Appeal, while allowing the plaintiff to sign judgment, further said that 'f_the defendants adopted the course of making an application to the High Court and succeeded in disclosing some case which shewed that there had been an excess of jurisdiction on the part of the Committgg then they might be allowed to set aside the judgment and raise that defence by plea. If the Court of Ap had meant that the defendants had shewn such a case here, then, wgizlzlever his lordship‘s own opinion might be, he should have deferred to their judgment and allowed, flhg defendants to raise this plea. But he did not so understand their 'ud . ment. They meant that leave must be obtained of this court to ei...b‘i the defendant to take that course, and that, before this court ave sn ii leave, it must be satisfied that there were grounds for coming tg the C clusion that the Committee had acted without jl1l‘l5d.lOfl0l1 N th cou

[ocr errors]

Jurisdiction of the Committee to determine. Couns l 11

oppose the B_ill said he appeared for these two gentlenieenvi Oaiigpifdrdgniiz the substantial petitioners were the persons against whom the Co ‘rte made this order. The judgment sought to he set aside was a juiiinlenl regularly signed under the provisions of a stringent Act of Pumilent which em owercd Parliamentary Committees to 111 such

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

The question in this case was whether the plaintiff was entitled to recover for services rendered by him to the defendant upon the terms_ of an alleged contract, which had not been reduced to writing, and by which the plaintiff had agreed to act as the defendant's traveller for a term of three years, in return for certain remuneration to be paid at the end of the term. The plaintiff, in fact, did serve the defendant as his traveller for the three years. The judgment of the Cover (Dar and Wii.i.s, JJ.) was delivered by _ _ _

\Vn.!.s, J., who said that, although the contract was not iiiwriting, and, therefore, could not be sued upon by reason of the_4th section of the Statute of Frauds, it had been held in Britniii v. Rossiter (27 \V. 452) that a contract within that section was not rendered absolutely void, but still existed so as, in certain cases, to prevent any 1m_pllO8lI10lJ Of another contract. But there had always existed a distinction between cases in which the action was for damages and those in which the action was for work done, money expended, or services rendered. In the latter class of cases, though the work had been done or the money expended under circumstances which shewed that the %lL!‘f.l0S had acted with reference to a definite agreement, the fact t at such an agreement existed which could not be sued upon had not been allowed to prevent the ordinary implication that the work had been done or the services rendered by the plaintiff on the terms of receiving reasonable remuneration. The present was a case of this latter class, and the plaintiff was here entitled to succeed -—C0l.'.\‘SBL, Willis, Q.C., and Timinl Atkinson," Digliain, Q.C., and 0'. E. Iona. SOLICITORS, lllaccolla ,- Brandon 4- Bm-knell, for Jones Q S078, Colchester.

[ocr errors]

In this case the appellant had been convicted before one of the Bistropolitan police magistrates for unlawfully “ professing and pretending to tell fortunes to deceive and impose on one T. K. and others of her Majesty s sub‘ects," under the provisions of section 4 of 5 Geo. 4, c. 83. The eviclence before the magistrate was that the appellant had inserted advertisements in various newspapers to the following_eflect :—“ Wanted, everyone to have their nativities cast. Yearly advice given and astrological questions answered. For terms send stamps, &c." A detective applied for terms and received a circular from the appellant, which stated his views on astrology as a science and continued :—-“ By the position of the planets in the nativity and their aspects to ea_ch other we are able to give the general description of the person, the diseases_lIflblfl to, health, mental abilities and disposition, the occupation most suitflblei marriage, &c. Interviews are unnecessary. All that is required is the time of birth as near as possible.” -Then followed a scale of charges It was contended on the part of the appellant that there was no evidence of a profession or pretence to tell the fortunes of T. l\., as nothin8 W“ told to him as being his fortune; that there was no evidence that the appellant did not believe the science he professed to apply and therefore no intention to deceive; that he did not pretend to 1111)’ mysterious power, but only to apply certain rules known to persons who had studied astrology. _

Tria Couar (consisting of DBNXAN AND Mari-law, JJ.), Wllil1°"l5 deciding whether the mere telling of fortunes is an offence, held that the conviction was right, and that there was ample evidence that the anpellfll had professed to tell fortunes within the meaning of the Act.-Oocssri, Murp/I!/1 Q C., and Wormrild; Poland. Soniciroiis, W. Webb Q’ Tl"'PI“°"1 Solicitor lo Hie Treasury.

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

This was an action against the Governor of Holloway Gaol for trespass and false imprisonment. The plaintiff had been committed to Holloway Gaol for six months under a warrant issued in pursuance of an order of the Queen's Bench Division, made under section 32 of 6 & 7 Vlct. c. 73, for having acted or practised as a solicitor without being duly qualified. The plaintitf was placed on the criminal side of the prison and treated as a criminal prisoner not sentenced to hard labour. He contended that he oughtto have been treated as a first-class misdemeanant. The sum of £50 was agreed upon as the amount of damages in case the defendant was liable. Section 20f 6 & 7 Vict. c T3 enacts that no person shall act as a solicitor without being duly qualified ; and section 32 provides that, if any solicitor shall knowingly act as agent for any person not duly qualified, or permit his name to be used by such person, any of the superior courts may, upon complaint made in a summary way, strike the solicitor off the roll, and may commit such unqualified person to prison for any term not exceeding one year. By section 4 of the Prisons Act, 1865, “criminal prisoner ” means any prisoner charged with, or convicted of, a crime , and section 67 enacts that a first-class misdemeanant shall not be deemed to be a criminal prisoner. Denman, J ., held that the plaintiff was not “ a person convicted of a crime” within section 4 of the Prisons Act, 1865, and gave judgment for him.

THE Covar or Avrslir. reversed this judgment. Lord Esriaa, M. R., said that the defendant had only to obey the warrant of commitment, and that was a sufllcientauthority to him. The warrant recited an order of committal under section 32 of 6 8: 7 Vict. c. 73, for having acted or practised as a sohcitor without being duly qualified. Was that offence a crime? Section 2 expressly prohibited it, and therefore made it a misdemeanour : Rey. v. Bu:/ianan (8 Q. B. 883). The offence therefore was a crime. His lordship also thought that section 32 of itself made it a crime. That being so, the personldeelt with under the last part of section 32 was “ convicted of a Crime.’ The plaintiff was not committed simply for a contempt of court within section 26 of the Solicitors Act, 1860, when, by section 41 of the Prisons Act, 18_77, he would be treated as a first-class misdemeanant. Further, the plaintiff did not come within the words in section 41, “ imP"l°l1Bd under any rule, order, or attachment for contempt of court,” as those words were all qualified by and referred to the words “ contempt of any court." The defendant was accordingly entitled to judzment.— Covssst, Cramp, Q.C., Wildey Wriqlit, and H. C‘. Ric/uzi-d.s; Sir R.E. Webster, AG-1 3- 3- 7Vri_qM, and Damilcwerts. Soucrrons, J. Perry Godfrey," Hare 4' 00., for Solicitor lo the T1-¢a.nir_y_

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

I_n this case the question arose as to what are “special circumstances ” which will induce the court to order the trial of an election petition to gilt place elsewhere than in the borough or county in which the election _ as been held. Both parties agreed in desiring that the trial of a petition ll‘ '_"P9¢H0 an illegal practice alleged to have been committed by the slllilllg member for the North-Western Division of Norfolk should take P We In London. The only charge was that Lord H. Bentinck, the sitting gmnlbelf. lmd sent a sum of £3 to an elector in a letter after the election bl" Services rendered during the election. It was stated that there would netWlilioflses on the part of the petitioner, for Lord H. Bentinck did wzmdlipulie the leW‘!‘. and probably Lord H. Bentlnck would be the only mu gas on the other side, and he was in London. It would therefore be Louvdmznore convenient and economical that the case should be heard in

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

‘, LAXV ASSOCIATION.

l At the usual monthly meeting of the directors. held at the h ill of the
Incorporated Law Society, Chancery-lane, on Thursday, the 3rd inst.-
the following being preseut:—Mr. Boodle, chairman, and Messrs. Dayle,
Hine-Haycock, Desborough, juu., Hedger, Sidney Smith, Spencer
Whitehead, and A. B. Carpenter, secretary—a grant of £50 was made
l to a member, one new member was elected, and the ordinary general
business was transacted.

SOLICITORS’ BENEVOLENT AS SOCIATION.

The usual monthly meeting of the board of directors of this Association was held at the Law Institution, Chancery-lane, London, on Wednesday, the 9th inst., Mr. \V. Edwood Shirley (Doncaster) in the chair. The other directors present were Messrs. W. Beriah Brook, H. Holland Burnc (Bath), G. B. Gregory, Edwin Hedger, R. Pennington, J - Anderson Rose, Sidney Smith, W. Melmoth Walters, F. T. Woolbert, and J. T. Scott (secretary). A sum of £290 was distributed in grants of relief, four new members were admitted to the Association, and other general business was transacted.

THE SHEFFIELD DISTRICT INCORPORATED LAW" SOCIETY.

The twelfth annual general meeting of the society was held on the 24th ult., Mr. Wm. Smith in the chair.

The notice convening the meeting, and the report, as printed, having been taken as read, it was resolved :—

1. That the report presented by the committee be received, confirmed, and adopted.

2. That the accounts of Mr. Broomhead (the treasurer) for the past year be approved and passed, and that the thanks of the society be given to him for his services.

3. That the cordial thanks of the society be given to Mr. John William Pye-Smith (the President) for the ability with which he has filled the office, and the consideration he has given to his duties during the past

ear.

y 4. That the cordial thanks of the society be given to Mr. Herbert
Bramley for the able manner in which he has discharged the offics of
honorary secretary from the commencement of the society. _

5. That Mr. Charles Macro Wilson be elected the President; Mr.
Barnard Platte Broomhead be elected the vice-president ; Mr. Broomhead
be re-elected the treasurer; and Mr. Bramley be re-elected the secretary
of the society. _ _

6. That the following gentlemen be hereby appointed to act with the ofhcers mentioned in the last resolution as the committee for the ensuing year, viz:—Mcssrs. A. J . Binney, R. M. Brown, G. Denton, H. Horsfleld (Barnsley), H. O. Maxfield, J . W. Pye-Smith, VV. E. Shirley (Doncaster), G. J. Simpson, F. P. Smith, Wm. Smith, E. Swift, Wm. \Vake, A. Wightman, D. Wightman, and G. B. Willis (Rotherham). _

7. That Messrs. T. W. Hall and J . B. Wheat, M.A., be appointed the auditors of the society for the ensuing year, and_ that t_h_e best thanks of the society be given to them for their kindness in auditing the accounts for the last year.

S. That the thanks of the society be given to C._B. S. Wortley, Esq., M.P , for his attention to the matters laid before him by the committee, and for prints of the public Bills brought into the House of Commons during the last two sessions, which he has forwarded to the committee.

9. ’l‘hat the attention of the Council of the Incorporated Law Society of the United Kingdom be called to the recent decisions of the courts, making trustees liable for deficiency of invested trust moneys caused by de reciation in mortgaged property where the original loan exceeded onchallf of the value of the property, and asking the council to promote a Bill to remedy this, such Bill to be framed on similar lines to that brought iii by Mr. Ince, M.P., in the session of 1885. _

That the thanks of the meeting be given to the chairman for presiding.

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

l

[graphic]
[graphic]

to public policy, and should be altered by statute." Mr. T. Bateman Napier opened the debate in the aflirmative, being supported by Messrs. Ernest Todd and John D. Crawford, and opposed by Messrs. W. Y. Woolcombe and G. A. Riddell. After the reply the chairman put the motion to the society, when it was carried by a majority of 2 votes. There were 38 members present, and the debate terminated at 9.16.

A very successful smoking concert in connection with the society was held at the Holbom Restaurant on the 23rd ult., under the presidenc of Mr. Frank Lockwood, Q.C., M.P., at which nearly 300 members and their friends attended.

[ocr errors]

Ifansron Law Danarixo Socrii'rr.—Feb. 25—Chuirman, Mr. Michael Willan, solicitor. After a few preliminaries had been dealt with a discussion took place on the_ following motion:—“That the opening of museums and pcture galleries on Sunday is desirable." Messrs. W. Bfeflkell, J. J. Itawsthorn, A. W. Ladyman, and T. B. Ladyinan supported the motion, and Messrs. J. Barrowclough and G. Cartwright opposed. The chairman then exhaustively summed up the arguments adduced pro and con, and put the question to the meeting, who decided in favour of the afilrmative by a majority of four. '

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

LEGAL NEWS. OBITUARY.

Mr. WILLIAM Susan, solicitor (the head of the firm of Shaen, Roscoe, Massey, Sc Henderson), of 8, Bedford-row, died suddenly at his residence, 15, Upper Phillimore-gardens, Kensingpon, on the 2nd inst., immediately after returning home from his ofiice. r. Shaen was the youngest son of Mr. Samuel Shaen, of Hatfield Peveril, Essex, and was born in 1821. He was educated at University College, London, and he dgraduated at the University of London, B.A. in 1810 and MA. in 1842, an he was admitted a solicitor in 1848. He had been for many years associated in partnership with Mr. Richard Roscoe, Mr. William Thomas Massey, and Mr. Henry Ashton Henderson. He was a Perpetual Commissioner for the county of Middlesex and the Cities of London and Westminster, and also a commissioner for taking aflidavits and examinivnvg witnesses in the Supreme Courts of the Colonies of New South ales, Victoria, and Queensland, and his private practice was very extensive. Mr. Shaen took a very warm interest in the prosperity of the University of London, and he was clerk of convocation from 1858 till 1868. He afterwards became a member of the Senate, and he took an active part in the movements for obtaining a Parliamentary representative for the University and for opening the University examinations to female students. He was a strenuous supporter of female education nnd of female suffrage. He was chairman of the Council of Bediord College, and was for many years solicitor to the Society for the Protection of Women and Children, and in 1866 he was solicitor to the Jamaica Committee. Mr. Shaen was a Fellow of University College, London, a director of the Solicitors’ Benevolent Association, and solicitor to the Temperance Building Society. He was a trustee of Dr. Wi.lliams's Library, a member of the Committees of the British and Foreign Unitarian Association and the Aborigines Protection Society, and of the Managing Committee of the Royal Normal College for the Blind. The Daily News says:—“ It was one of Mr. Sheen's characteristics all through life that he gained the confidence and afiection of all with whom he had to do. He united to great zeal for whatever he took in hand a singular clearness of intellectual vision. He was consequently at the furthest remove from all suspicion of fanaticism, though everybody felt his earnestness and persistency. Of his professional work the great reputation of the firm of which he was tho head is the best testimony.” Among the more important legal proceedings in which Mr. Shaen was engaged may be mentioned the Colenso and Voysey ecclesiastical suits.

—:-i

APPOINTMENTS.

Sir Hsimv J.-\l\(ES Sl'M.NER Mama, K.C.S.I. , LL.D. , has been elected Whewell Professor of International Law in the University of Cambridge,on the resignation of the Right Hon. Sir William Vernon Harcourt, (.1. C., M.P. Sir H. Maine is the eldest son of Dr. James Maine, and was born in 1823._ He was educated at Christ‘s Hospital _and at Pembroke College, Cambridge, where he graduated as senior classic and 1st Chancellor's Medallist and also as a senior optima in 184-1. He obtained the Chancellor's English Medal in 1842, the Craven Scholarship in 18-13, and the Chancellor's Classical Medal in 1844, and he was afterwards elected a Fellow of Trinity Hall aud proceeded to the degree of LL.D. He was called to the bar at Lincoln'sinn in Trinity Term. 1850, but he afterwards migrated to the Middle Temple. He formerly ractised in the Court of Chancery, and he was for several years arevisinggiarrister for the County of Middlesex. He WB8 Regius Professor of Civil Law in the University of Cambridge from 1847 till 1854, legal member of the Council of the Governor-General of India from 1862 till 1870, and Corpus Professor of Jurisprudence in the University of Oxford from 1870 till 1877, when he was elected master of Trinity Hall, Cambrid e. He was created a Knight Commander of the Order of the Star of India in 1871. Sir H. Maine is a bencher of the Middle Temple, and he has been a member of the Council of the Secretary of State for ndia since 1871.

Mr. ALFRED Kixonos, barrister, has been appointed Solicitor-General for the Colony of British Guiana. Mr. Kingdon is the third son of the late Mr. Thomas Kingdon Kingdon, Q.C., Recorder of Bristol, and was born in 1854. He was called to the bar at the Inner Templein July, 1878. H0 formerly practised on the Western Circuit. He has been for some time aotmg as Attorney-General of the Island of St. Vincent.

Mr. Faaxcis Hiinrsos, solicitor (of the firm of Hampson 8: Crosse), Of Manchester, has been elected President of the Manchester Incorporated Law_Association for the ensuing year. Mr. Hampson was admitted B solicitor in 1853.

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

GENERAL.

The report of the committee appointed in December, 1885, b the Board of Trade to inquire into the manner in which the Patent 021162 was °“_15'1Y1-"8 Out the Patent Act of 1883 was published on Saturday, together K11 @116 fmdence taken by the committee. The committee recommend that

? Practice introduced by the Act of 1883 of warning applicants of the gtllgfltfiice of unpublished applications likely to conflict with their own tioenh bi? d{0pped._ In the unanimous opinion of the witnesses this pracmi ad entirely failed, and it was calculated that the repeal of the pro

aélntxould result in a saving of £300 to £400 a year. In the case of a Pp _111b_ Bing abandoned in consequence of a filed but unpublished de

'"P 1°11. the committee thought that the lees should be returned. The gg'°1“€)gYHtem oi examining applications appeared to the committee to be . ° a fate, find they considered that it might be simplified by diminish"IE the excessive amount of supervision exercised.

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

WINDING UP NOTICES. London Gdntt¢.—FamaY March 4. JOINT STOCK COMFANIES. LDHTED IN Cmucanr. BRITISH Einrar 00., LIlll1TED.—Byan order made by Kay, J., dated Fob 2i. it was ordered that voluntary winding up of company be continued. Moore, B8

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

aims

WEST LONDON COMMERCIAL BANK, Lim'rizn.—Chitty. J., has fixed Thursday, March i7, at 12, at his chambers. for appointment of oiiicial liquidator

Uxmiursm IN CIIANCERY.

BRIGHTON Drsrizwr TRAMWAYB Oo.—By an order made by Stirling, J ., dated Feb 26, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Hare 6: O0, Surrey st, Strand, solora for petner

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

m

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

GRAY, GEORGE, York, Gent. , June 1. Crumbie, Stonegate, York
LESSERT, CHARLES Gnmnsox DE. Wolverhampton, Surgeon Dentist. April 12.

Th rne &Co, Wolverham ton _ _
HAUDLE%, WILLIAM, Newton Heath, Lancaster, Retired Schoolmaster. April
14. Minor, Manchester _ _
HAWKINS, ELIZABETH, Dinthill, Salop. April 15. Minor, Manchester
HOLT, RIORARD, Horbury, York. April 4. Hill. Halifax
Hoor;a3i;ii.dGEO€zoE, Bridgwater, Timber Merchant. March 25. Reed & Cook.
gwa er _ _ __
HUME, REUBEN, Kidderminster, Victualler. April 5. Talbot, Iudderminster
LAsT, VVILLIAM NELs0N. North Bury St Edmund-, Yvatclimnker. March 14.
Woolnoiigh & Co, Bury St Edniunds
Lnorns, WILLIAM Cnnisrornnn. Hornsey rise, Printing Ink Manufacturer.
A iril 10. Maynard & Son. Cliiiord’s inn
LOWE. WILLIAM. Birmingham, Tin Plate \Vorker. April 1. Saunders & Brad-
bury, Birmingham
MOsLEY, SOPHIA ANNE, Rolleston, Stafford. April 15. Small, Burton on Trent
MOWAT, GEORGE, Seaton’s Sluice, Northumberland, Mariner. March 31. Keep-
in & Gloail. Strand _
NEILL, %IIABLO’1'I‘E, Talbot rd, Bayswater. March 31. East, Basinghall st
PEMDER, J AMEs, Borrow, \Vorcester, Innkeeper. April 12. Powell, Upton upon

[ocr errors]

Pnrans, TIIOMAs, Mold, Flint, Gent. April 1S. Kelly & Keene, Mold, Flint
POOLE, J AXE, Liverpool. April 22. Priest & Son, Liverpool
PRIDDLE. HENRY CRESWBLL,NitO1J, Isle of Wight, Esq. April 1. Vincent, yde,

R
Isle of YVight _
RIDDELL, FRANCES, Redland, Bristol. April 9. Hamlin 8: 'Whitty, Bristol

[ocr errors]

ROBINSON. ELIZABETH, Alircd st, Colebrooke row, Islington. April 5. Rumsey,
Finsbury pk rd

ROWLANDS, MARY, Sundcrland, Beer Retailer. March 19. Green, Sunderland
SAMUEL, FANNY YATES, Liverpool. March 16. Parkinson & Hess, Liverpool

SMITH. GEORGE, Wednesbur3', Stafiord, Confectioner. March 28. Brookes,
Wednesbiiry
BNAPE, JANE, Norwich. April 30. Clabburn, Norwich

STONE, FRANCES MARY, Tatenhill, Stafiord. April 15. Small, Burton on Trent
F?

[ocr errors]

WRIGHT, EUPIIEMIA, Anerley, Surrey. July 31. Carrill 8: Son, Rood lane

YOUNG, EDWARD, Camden rd, Cabinet Maker. April 6. Withall & Co, Great
George st

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

Ms.» I2 1281-_
M . .

[ocr errors]

MOGOWAN. JAMES, Whitehaven, Boot Maker. Whiteliaven. Pet March 1. Ord
March i
NOELE, JOHN WALTER, Carlisle, Roper. Carlisle. Pet Feb 28. Ord Feb 28

UCKENDEN, EDMUND JURY, Hove, Builder. Brighton. Pet Feb 26. Ord Feb 26
OWEN, RIORARD EDWARD, Wiileall, Grocer. Walsall. Pet Feb 28. Ord Feb 28

PEGLER, FREDERICK UBIAH, Swansea, Ironmonger. Swansea. Pet March 2.
Ord March 2 _

PIIILLIPS, CHARLES J OYOE, Swindon, Builder. Swmdon. Pet March 1. Ord
March 1

PLAYER, OCTAVIUS R, Bath, Hay Dealer. Bath. Pet Feb 23. Ord Feb 26

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

I 0 e

STEWART, J OHN, Newark upon Trent, Grocer. Nottingham. Pet March 2.
Ord March 2 _

STONE, RICHARD, jun. Childrey, nr Vlantage, Berks, Farmer. Oxford. Pet
March 1. Ord March 1

Tnoliiis. JIAMES, Newport, Mon, Baker. Newport, Mon. Pet March 1. Ord

are 1 1

TRERISE, RICHARD, Over Whitacre, Warwick, Farmer. Birmingham. Pct
Feb 4. Ord March 1

WATSON, WALTER, JAMEs WALLAOE WATSON, and ALLAN GROOME DOUGLAS,
Birmingham, Lithoizrnpliers. Biriningliani. Pct itlarch 2. Ord Mai-ch 2

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[graphic]
[ocr errors][graphic][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][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]
« PreviousContinue »