Page images



give security for the costs of the opponents. And it was ordered that, WELDHEN v. SCATTERGOOD-O. A. No. 2, 23rd March. until the security was given, the applicant should not take any further APPEAL-SECURITY FOR Costs – MARRIED Woman-SEPARATB Estate, proceedings in the matter against the opponents. The security was not MARRIED WOMEN'S PROPERTY Act, 1882, s. 1, SUB-SECTION 2. given, and on the 15th of March the opponents gave notice of a motion

for the 18th of March, before North, J., in court, that the applicant might The question in this case was whether a married woman, who is an

be ordered to give the security within seven days, and that, in default of appellant, can be required to give security for the costs of her appeal if it his doing so, his application might be dismissed with costs, without any is shewn that she has not the means of paying the costs if unsuccessful. further order. Sub-section 2 of section 1 of the Married Women's Property Act, 1882,

North, J., held that the opponents were entitled to the preremptory provides that a married woman shall be capable of suing and being sued, order for which they asked. But he said that the application ought to have either in contract or tort, or otherwise, in all respecte as if she were a feme been made, not by motion in court, but by summons in chambers, and sole, and “any damages or costs recovered against her in any such action

therefore he should only allow the opponents the costs of a summons.or proceeding_shall be payable out of her separate property, and not Counsel, Cozens- Hardy, Q.O.; Ingpen. SOLICITORS, Janson, Cobb, & Co.; E. otherwise." It was argued that the above words in inverted commas

Kennedy. vent the court from requiring a married woman to give security for costs.

The Court of Appeal (Cotton and LINDLEY, L JJ.) held that there was STANLEY v. MAYOR, ALDERMEN, AND CITIZENS OF THE CITY no foundation for this argument, and required the appellant to give

OF NORWICH-Kekewich, J., 23rd March. security.-COUNSEL, J. Cutier ; J. Henderson. SOLICITORS, Pitman f Sons ; F. J. & G. J. Braikenridge.


c. 76), s. 2. Re THE CHELSEA WATERWORKS CO.—Kay, J., 12th March. In this action, which was brought by four freemen of Norwich on

behalf of themselves and the other freemen, the plaintiffs claimed as their LANDS CLAUSES Act, 1845 (8 & 9 Vict. c. 18), s. 69–LANDS TAKEN FROM CORPORATION WHO HAVE NO Power TO SELL—PURCHASE-MONEY PAID Close, at Norwich. It formed part of land formerly belonging to the

private property some eighty acres of building land, called the Town INTO COURT-PAYMENT OUT-Persons “ ABSOLUTELY ENTITLED.'

Prior of Norwich, which he had released to the "mayor, sheriffs, citizens, The Metropolitan Board of Works, acting under the provisions of the and commonalty" in pursuance of a compromise of a dispute about the Lands Clauses Act, purchased compulsorily certain lands belonging to the respective rights of the priory and the city. In 1524 the corporation Chelsea Waterworks Co. in fee, which were actually in use at the time directed that no “foreign inhabitant" should put any beast to pasture on for the purposes of the company; and another site for the water pipes this land, but only citizen inhabitants," and it appeared from the was provided. The company was incorporated under an Act of 1852, evidence that the rent of the land had, until a year or two since, been paid which incorporated the Lands Clauses Act, and they had no power to sell to the freemen. It was contended on behalf of the defendants that the other than superfluous land. The purchase-money was paid into court property belonged to the corporation for the benefit of all the citizens and under section 69, and the company now petitioned that it might be paid not to one particular class of them. out to them as being persons "absolutely entitled to such money within KekewICH, J., said there were many questions of interest in the case, the section. It was also argued that it ought not to have been paid into but the main one was whether, having regard to the Municipal Corpora

tions Act, 1835, s. 2, the property in question was the private property of KAY, J., said that he could not follow The Caledonian Railway Co. V. one particular class of the inhabitants. The clause of the Act was in these The City of Glasgow Union Railway Co. (Sc. Sess. Cas., 3rd series, vol. 7, terms :-"And whereas, in divers cities, towns, and boroughs, the comp. 1072), and must hold that it was right to pay the money into court. mon land and public stock of such cities, towns, and boroughs, and the But it could not be applied according to any of the directions given in rents and profits thereof, have been held and applied for the particular section 69, except that to pay to the persons absolutely entitled. The benefit of the citizens, freemen, and burgesses of the said cities, towns, company were absolutely entitled, and the money must be paid out to and boroughs respectively, or of certain of them, or of the widows or them.-COUNSEL, J. Dicon ; F. Pownall. SOLICITORS, Few f: Co.; Solicitors kindred of them, or certain of them, and have not been applied to public to the Metropolitan Board of Works.

purposes : be it therefore enacted: That every person who now is, or

hereafter may be, an inhabitant of any borough, and also every person Re FLETCHER, SMITH v. FLETCHER–North, J., 17th March.

who has been admitted, or who now is, or hereafter may be, the wife or WILL-CONSTRUCTION POWER TO TRUSTEES TO EXPEND MONEY IN

widow, or son or daughter, of any freeman or burgess, or who may have

espoused, or may hereafter espouse, the daughter or widow of any COMPLETING AND FURNISHING A HOUSE.

freeman or burgess, or who may have been, or may hereafter be, The question in this case was whether certain expenditure which the bound an apprentice, shall have and enjoy and be entitled trustees of a will proposed to make was authorized by a power given to to acquire and enjoy the

share and benefit of the them by the will to expend money in the completion and furnishing of a lands, tenements, hereditaments, and of the rents and profits mansion house. The testator was a domiciled Englishman, but he had an therefor, and of the common lands and public stock of any borough estate in Scotland called the L. Estate. He made an English will of or body corporate

as fully and effectually, and for such his personalty; he also made a Scotch deed disposition and settle. time and in such mamer he or she, by any statute, charter, ment of his Scotch real estate. By this instrument he settled the bye-law, or custom in force at the time of passing this Act, might or L. Estate on his son F., whom he constituted heir in entail. The could have had, acquired, or enjoyed in case this Act had not been testator had before his death commenced extensive alterations in the passed.” He should decide the case as if it had been brought the day mansion house on the L. Estate, which were not completed at the time of after the passing of the Act. The question really reduced itself to this his death. By a codicil to his English will he directed that, in case he - how had the property been held and enjoyed for the last 350 years? should die before the mansion house which he was building on his L. From the extracts produced from the documents of the Corporation, it Estate and the outbuildings, gardens, and grounds thereto should be com was clear that, when there were receipts from the land, freemen, and pleted, furnished, and planted respectively, his executors should pay to freemen alone, were entitled to share them. It had been suggested that the trustees of his Scotch trust disposition and settlement such a sum not their enjoyment of these rents and profits was of grace, not of right, less than $5,000, por more than £15,000, as such trustees in their absolute but the entrier did not bear this out. At the time, then, of the passing discretion should deem necessary or proper for the purpose, to be of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1835, the freemen were in the enjoy. expended by them in or towards the completion, furnishing, and planting ment of certain property, and their enjoyment, he thought, came under respectively of the said mansion house and the outbuildings, gardens, and the word “custom in section 2 of that Act, which, however, was not grounds thereto. The Scotch trustees desired to apply the whole sum of "custom" in the strict legal sense, and that without reference to the $15,000 on certain proposed expenditure. As the executors of the English origin and legality of the rights. Prestney v. Mayor and Corporation of will were to a great extent the same persons as the Scotch trustees, Colchester and the Attorney-General (21 Ch. D. 111) seemed very much in. they wished to have the decision of the court whether the propose point, and he should follow it. There would be a declaration that the expenditure was authorized by the power. Among the items of the pro- Corporation held the Town Close in trust for the freemen of the city of posed expenditure was a large sum for the installation of apparatus for Norwich, and an account accordingly; also an inquiry as to who were lighting the premises by electricity, a sum of £3,738 for garden houses, a the freemen entitled to the benefit of the declaration, and any question sum of nearly £3,000 for plate, pictures, china, books, and other articles, as to what constituted a freeman of Norwich could be determined under and a sum of $1,000 for one picture, which had been already bought by that inquiry. It would be open to the Attorney-General to apply for a the installation of electric lighting apparatus was within the power, as was Q.C., Elton, Q.C., and 'w. Phipson Beale ; Ingle-Joyce. SOLICITORS, C.

NORTH, J., was of opinion that the expenditure of a proper amount on -COUNSEL, Warmington, Q0., Swinfen Eady, and shearman ; Barber, also the expenditure on garden houses and plate, pictures, and books Martelli, for' J. Stanley, Norwich; Sharpe, Parkers, Pritchard, $ Sharpe, for such as the trustees considered necessary and proper. But he thought H. B. Miller, Norwich ; Hare g Co. they were not justified in paying the £1,000 for the picture which the son had already bought. — COUNSEL, Napier Higgins, Q.O., and Methold; Finlay, Q.O., and Ingle Joyce. SOLICITORS, Gregory, Rowcliffes, & Co.

In the Goods of PRICE-P. D. & A. Div., 22nd March.


RIED Women's PROPERTY Act, 1882, ss. 1, 6, 7, 23. PRACTICE-SECURITY FOR Costs--APPLICATION BY Motion or Summons-batu do the theore married woman in a general form, and not in the Costs.

ordinary form, limited to such personal estate as the deceased had a right trade mark obtained in chambers, on the 24th of February, an order that wilt, given all her real and personal property to the use of her daughter the applicant, who was a foreigner residing out of the jurisdiction, should Frances Amelia Price, absolutely, and had appointed Frederick Joseph




Jan 13

If the property is personalty (other than leasehold), the ACCOMMODATION FOR PRISONERS AWAITING

plaintiff should be appointed receiver limiting the amount to

be received to the amount of his judgment debt and costs of TRIAL.

obtaining the order, not exceeding £4. T'he report of the committee appointed last year to inquire into the present accommodation for prisoners in court-houses and other places while awaiting trial at assizes and sessions, and to report what alterations

HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE-CHANCERY DIVISON. they may consider desirable in the existing arrangements,” has recently

ORDER OF COURT, appeared. The committee deal in detail with the existing accommodation

Thursday, the 24th day of March, 1887. in about 200 of the court-house lock-ups. They say that “in some order and decency are attempted to be enforced by the presence of an officer

Whereas, from the present state of the business hefore Mr. Justice Chitty, among the prisoners ; in others no officer could be expected to endure the Mr. Justice North, Mr. Justice Stirling, and Mr. Justice Kekewich atmosphere in which the prisoners have to spend their time; and the respectively, it is expedient that a portion of the causes assigned to Mr.

Justice Chitty, Mr. Justice North, and Mr. Justice Stirling should for the worst evils of that promiscuous association, against which it has been a primary object of modern prison discipline to guard, must be encountered purpose only of hearing or of trial be transferred to Mr. Justice Kekewich. for hours, and even days together, by children, women, and men who Now I, the Right Honourable Hardinge Stanley, Baron Halsbury, Lord may be, and some of whom are, innocent. In some places where separa- High Chancellor of Great Britain, do hereby order that the several causes tion is effected it is by means which appear to be capable of amounting set forth in the schedules hereto be accordingly transferred from the said to positive torture. Men and women are, in many such places of deten: Mr. Justice Chitty, Mr. Justice North, and Mr. Justice Stirling to Mr. tion, bolted for many consecutivo hours, sometimes for many consecutive Justice Kekewich, for the purpose only of hearing or of trial, and be days, into boxes or cupboards measuring, in some instances, as little as

marked in the cause books accordingly. And this order is to be drawn 2ft. 4in. by 2ft. lin. (Gloucester, where prisoners have been confined in

up by the registrar and set up in the several offices of the Chancery these boxes six days running), and even 2ft. bin. by 1ft. Sin. in one

Division of the High Court of Justice. instance (Bodmin). This practice is more common than might be sup.

FIRST SCHEDULE. posed, as the following specimens will shew :-Central Criminal Court,

From Mr. Justice Chitty (Witness Actions). boxes, 2ft. 6in. by 3ft. ; Surrey Sessions, 3ft. 10in. by 2ft. 2in. ; Clerken - Tristam v Eld 1886 T_253 Dec 17 well Sessions, 4ft. by 2ft. 9in. ; Devizes, 2ft. 4in. by 2ft. 6in.; Salisbury, Randall v Evans 1886 R 879 Dec 20 3ft. by 2ft. 6in.; Marlborough, 2ft. by 2ft. 4in.; Gloucester, 2ft. lin. by In re Moone, decd, Moone v Moone 1886 M 1499 Dec 21 2ft. 4in. ; Lewes, 2ft. 6in. by 3ft.; and Bodmin, 2ft. 6in. by 1ft. 9in. "When it is considered that a great many of such cells are all but dark, Meston Kelday 1886 M 325 Dec 24

Condy & Mitchell, ld, v Taylor & Co, ld 1886 C 3824 Dec 23 that for their inmates there is no possibility of distraction of any kind, In Te M A Taylor, decd, Turpin v Pain 1886 T 1458 Jan 5 that some are close and overheated by hot-water pipes or gas burners,

Ellis v Workman 1886 E 6811 Jan 5 while in others the temperature in winter is often as low as 40 to 45 Punchard v Imperial Continental Water Corporation, ld 1885 P 2767 degrees, with damp and unprotected stone floors, it is not using the language

Jan 6 of exaggeration to say that such a method of confinement may inflict great Birmingham and District Land Co, id, v L&N W Ry Co

1886 B 571 suffering, both of body and mind, and that its wholesale adoption savours

Jan 7 little of the humanity which is extended to convicted criminals. of such places there are either no seats at all (Newcastle-under-Lyme), or Ford, Rathbone, & co w Aspdin. 1886 F 431 Jan 8 seats of brick (Dorchester), or of stone (Lancaster). In very many

Earl of Darnley v London, Chatham, and Dover Ry Co 1886 D 821 instances the rooms or cells are without any means procuring warmth ; in many others, the only method of warming is by burning the gas jet,

Young v Berriman 1886 Y 220 Jan 20 without which the inmates would be in partial or total darkness; and, as

Patents Investment Co, ld, v Crompton 1886 P 2372 Jan 20 it is rather the exception than the rule to find adequate ventilation, the In re C Moreton, otherwise Coppen, decd, Moreten v Coppen 1886 M

Pile v Simons 1886 P 1923 Jan 22 state of the atmosphere at the close of the day must necessarily be foul

1681 Jan 24 and unwholesome. In some cases the offices of nature, if performed at Clay v Bracken 1886 C 3145 Jan 28 all, must be performed in the presence from two to eight or ten specta- Baroness Wenlock y River Dee Co, la 1886 W 1293 Jan 31 The committee say :-“It will be necessary as things stand, and in any Phillips v Phillips 1886 P 1795 Feb 3

Ducky Hengh 1886 Đ 1900 Jan 31 case desirable, to work through the local authorities, and as far as possible with them, and it is very satisfactory to observe the number of Pickford v Pickford 1886 P 1241 Feb 4

Hawkins v Ring 1886 H 4170 Feb 4 instances in which the representations of the Prison Commissioners have Taylor y Faulkner 1886 T 1631 Feb 10 been favourably received and acted upon by the authorities. In some instances, however, a different spirit has prevailed, and it is obvious that

Gas Light and Coke Co v South Met Gas Co 1886 G 1980 Feb 12 such of the lccal authorities as have been so far forgetful of their duties In re J McQuinn, decd, Hill. v Buckley, 1885 M 3792 Feb 14 as to have allowed such things as have been pointed out to pass must need Higgens v Maber 1886 1.4163 Feb 14 some effectual pressure from without." The committee then enumerate the matters to be amended. These

Baxter v Harfield & Co 1885 B 5102 Feb 16 are, shortly, separation; increased space; proper warmth and ventilation ;

Edwards v Jones 1886 E 1001 Feb 19 and deeent sanitary accommodation. With regard to warmth the commit

Parsons v Saffory 1886 P 1198 Feb 22 fall to 40deg, or 45deg., or even lower in very cold weather. The persons tee say in Many of the places of confinement in question are liable to Haymes v Leach, Leach v Haymes 1886 H 4245 Feb 22

SECOND SCHEDULE. confined in them can generally take no exercise of any kind. They are,

Before Mr. Justice North (Witness Actions). as a rule, poorly clad, and not particularly well fed. It offends any due Taylor v Graham 1885 T 1,748 March 18 sense of fair play to keep a person under conditions which must benumb Fox v Denton 1885 F 1,793 March 20 his faculties, paralyze his energies, and make him physically miserable, Croft y Rickmansworth Highway Board 1885 C 3,190 March 22 and then, after some hours of this treatment, to call upon him at a mom. ent's notice to struggle for his liberty, perhaps for many years, against Chatteris v Isacson 1886

Bowman v Hopper 1885 B 3,595 June 19

C 143 Nov 18 and in the presence of persons who are, generally speaking, at all events Hawkins y Hawkins 1886 H 3,368 Nov 19

Stobbs v Kelsey 1882 S 4,971 Nov 25
In re W. Farrow, Moore v Farrow 1886 F 1,176 Nov 25
Bunting v Mulkerntors 1885 B 2,335 Nov 30

In re Fletcher, Barnett v Fletcher 1883 B 712 Dec 1

Wood v Aylward 1886 W 2,471 Dec 2

Topham v Booth 1886 T 893 Dec 4 APPOINTMENT OF RECEIVER BY WAY OF EQUITABLE Lodge Poole 1886 L 641 Dec 4 EXECUTION.

Ede v Watson 1885 E 446 Dec 6 The following departmental directions, dated the 19th of March, have been Elliot y Steel 1885 E 592 Dec 11

Paget v Ethcuit Paget v Ellis 1886 P 1,318 Dec 7 issued to the summons and Order Department (Q. B. Div.) as to orders Cooke, Sons, & Co. v The New River Co. 1886 C 2,392 Dec 13 appointing a receiver by way of equitable execution. I. In all cases where the judgment for debt and costs is for more than Furber v Best 1886 F 1,123 Dec 14

Todd v Herring 1886 T 1,427 Dec 13
£50 and less than £100, a direction is to be added to the order that Noakes r Room
The total amount to be allowed for the costs of the Sahler v Füchs 1886 S 4,665 Dec 15

1886 N 911 Dec 14
Receiver (including his poundage, the costs of obtaining the
appointment, of completing the security, passing his accounts, Mears y Bull

Caswell v Hunton 1886 C 3,797 Dec 20
and obtaining his discharge), shall not exceed 10 per cent. of Rowe School Board for London 1886 R 1,884 Dec 31

1886 M 2,336 Dec 20
the amount for which the judgment is signed.”'
II. Where the judgment (for debt and costs) is for a sum less than £50, Bailey v Bailey 1886 B 3,401 Jan 5

Nicholls v Kimpton 1886 N 1,444 Jan 5 then, If the property is freehold or leasehold, the plaintiff should Rudder v Booth 1886 R 871

Marshall v Cox 1886 M 2,872 Jan 6
be made (by the order) answerable for the receiver, but no Tennant, Widow, v Lord Claud Hamilton_1885 T 1,936 Jan 8

Jan 6
further security need be required, and the receiver should not Buttery London & N W Ry Co 1885 B 2,759 Jan 11
act without the leave of the court or a judge.

Woolf's Woracott 1886 W 2,344 Jan 11



Hart v Shaw 1886 H 3,578 Jan 18

Apollinaris Co, Id v Apollo Water Co, ld 1886 A 155 Jan 21
Foster v Wheeler 1886 F 1,120 Jan 22
Earl Sydney v Lowe 1886 S 1,285 Jan 28
Fox Bros. & Co. v Paget 1886 F 1,037 Jan 28
Lovejoy v Downes 1886 L2,635 Jan 29
Robertson v Sankey 1886 R2,033 Jan 31
The Sun Permanent Building Society v Luke 1886 S 2,013 Feb 1

From Mr. Justice STIRLING (Witness Actions)
In re Naylor, Naylor v Daws 1885 N 660 Dec 17
Cavanagh v Riddell 1884 C 891 Dec 21
McClellan v Cloute 1885 M 1896 Jan 18
Rawlins v Webb 1884 R 2104 March 30
Godfrey Winsford 1885 G 2315 April 3
Skidmore v Skidmore 1886 S 176 May 10
Freke v Houseman 1885 F 823 Oct 25
Hough v Saul 1885 H 152 Oct 26
Coates & Co v Moyle & Son 1886 C 72 Oct 28
Bray v Gardrer 1885 B 3978 Nov 3
Hili v Sheffield 1885 H 1943 Nov 5
Richards y Deane 1886 R 353 Nov 10
Branchi v Bennett 1886 B 1757 Nov 15
Morgan & Co, id, v ES Windover & Co, ld 1886 M 1220 Nov 16
Eady v Eady 1886 E 698 Nov 17
Gardener v Vicat & ora 1886 G 808 Nov 18
Fisher v Holland 1885 F 759 Dec 1
Russell Geere 1886 R 450 Dec 6
In re Rust, Bull v Rust 1886 R 1802 Dec 14
Prior y Moore 1886 P 2,346 Dec 14
Newen v Owen 1886 N 677 Dec 17
Ferris, Townsend, & Co. v Weston 1886 F 925 Dec 17
In ra Trueman, Bradley v Turnbull 1886 T 521 Dec 20
In re Trueman, Bradley v Turnbull 1886 T 522 Dec 20
Smith v School Board for Prescott 1886 S 1,252 Dec 30
American Braided Wire Co. v Thomson & Co, 1886 A 1,136 Jan 5
Foster v Holland 1886 F 1,180 Jan 5
School Board for London v Blum 1884 L 2,914 Jan 14
Elborough v Tester 1886 E 763 Jan 15
In re Childe Harold Head, Head v Head 1886 H 3,356 Jan 17



this court, and those present who watch the administration of justice, my high opinion of the manner in which Mr. Brandon always discharged the duties of the office he had undertaken, and our very great regret that we should be deprived of his services.” Mr. Glyn expressed the profound feeling of regret with which the members of the bar had received the intelligence

Mr. GUILDFORD WILLIAM DALE RICHARDSON, solicitor, of 13, Pall Mall, died on the 21st ult. Mr. Richardson was the eldest son of Mr. Guild. ford Barker Richardson, of Blackheath, and was born in 1847. He was educated at Blackheath School, and he was formerly scholar of Trinity College, Cambridge, where he graduated as tenth wrangler in 1870. He was admitted a solicitor in 1876.

Mr. ROBERT BRUCE RUSSELL, barrister, died on the 18th inst., from pneumonia. Mr. Russell was the second son of Mr. James Russell, Q.C., and was born in 1845. He was educated at Magdalen College, Oxford. He was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Michaelmas Term, 1871, and he practised on the Midland Circuit and at the Lincoloshire, Nottinghamshire, and Derbyshire Sessions. Mr. Russell was an examiner of the High Court. He had had considerable experience as a law reporter. He was formerly one of the staff of the Weekly Reporter, and rather more than a year ago he was placed on the staff of the Law Reports.

Mr. WILLIAM BRICE, solicitor, late town clerk of Bristol, died suddenly on the 14th inst., in his seventy-fifth year. Mr. Brice was born in 1812. He was admitted a solicitor about the year 1834, and for many years he conducted an extensive practice at Bristol, in partnership with the late Mr. Daniel Burges. He was clerk to the city magistrates from 1849 till 1874, when, on the death of Mr. Burges, he succeeded to the town clerkship. He resigned the latter office and retired from practice about seven years ago. Mr. Brice was a magistrate for Gloucestershire. He was unmarried He was buried at Clifton on the 19th inst.

Mr. William THURGOOD, solicitor, of Saffron Walden, Essex, who died at Littlehampton on the 12th inst., in the seventy-third year of his age, was the eldest son of the late Mr. Robert Driver Thurgood, conveyancer, of Saffron Walden. He was born at Saffron Waldon in the year 1815. He was educated at Mill Hill, and was admitted a solicitor in 1835. He was appointed in 1836 clerk to the magistrates at Saffron Walden, and on the death of his father received the position of clerk to the guardians, which appointment he held until the end of 1885, when he retired from business. He married in 1839 Charlotte, second daughter of the late Mr. Michael Lane, solicitor, of Braintree, Essex, by whom he has left four sons. His remains were interred at Littlehampton on the 15th inst.


Mr. JOHN TANKERVILLE Goldey, a Puisne Judge of the Colony of British LEGAL NEWS,

Guiana, has been appointed a Puisne Judge of the Supreme Court of

the Straits Settlements. Mr. Justice Goldney is the youngest son of Sir OBITUARY.

Gabriel Goldney, Bart., and was born in 1846, and he was educated at The Hon. RICHARD Denman, barrister, died at his residence, Wester- Harrow, and at Trinity College, Cambridge. He was called to the bar at gate, Sussex, on the 19th inst., in his seventy-fourth year. Mr. Denman the Inner Temple in Easter Term, 1869. He formerly practised on the was the third son of the first Lord Denman, and elder brother of Mr. Northern Circuit. He was Attorney: General of the Leeward Islands Justice Denman. He was born in 1814, and he was educated at Eton and from 1880 till 1883, when he was appointed a Puisne Judge of the Colony at Trinity College, Cambridge. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn of British Guiana. in Easter Term, 1838, and he formerly practised on the Northern Circuit. Mr. WILLIAM ANTHONY MUSGRAVE SHERIFF, a Puisne Judge of the In 1840 he was appointed by his father, when Lord Chief Justice of Supreme Court of the Straits Settlements, has been appointed a Puisie since 1876

in the same capacity on the South-Eastern Circuit. Mr. son of Mr. James Watson Sheriff, of Antigua. He was called to the bar Denman was heir-presumptive to the Barony of Denman. magistrate for the county of Sussex. He was married in 1840 to the of Grenada from 1872 till 1880, when he became Attorney-General of the

at the Middle Temple in Trinity Term, 1867. He was Attorney-General daughter of Mr. Hugh Jones, of Lark Hill, Lancashire, and he leaves Bahamas, and he was appointed a Puisne Judge of the Supreme Court of four sons and one daughter. His only surviving son, Mr. Thomas Hugh the Straits Settlements in 1885. Anderson Denman, was called to the bar at Lincoln’s-inn in Michaelmas Term, 1881, and is a member of the Northern Circuit.

Mr. FREDERICK PIPER BADDELEY, solicitor, of 60, Leadenhall-street, Mr. WOODTHORPE BRANDON, assistant-judge of the Mayor's Court, Court of Judicature.

has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme died at his residence, Mill Hill, Barnes, on the 17th inst., from paralysis, in his seventy-fifth year. Mr. Brandon was the second son of Mir. Henry Cobbett), of Manchester, has been appointed by the High Sheriff of

Mr. WILLIAM COBBETT, solicitor (of the firm of Cobbett, Wheeler, & Brandon Chis mother having been the sister of Mr. Henry Woodthorpe, Staffordshire (Mr. George Fox) to be Under-Sheriff of that county for the Temple in Michaelmas Term, 1851, having held the office of deputy; med, at St. Paul's School. He was called me ithe bar at the assidue ensuing year. Mr. Cobbett was admitted a solicitor in 1868.

Mr. JOHN HENRY ROBINSON, solicitor, of East Retford, has been ape intrar of the court, and in 1874 he became assistant-judgement to be under-Sheriff of that county for the ensuing year. Mr. Robinson Brandon was the author of treatises on The Practice of the Lord Mayor's was admitted a solicitor in 1882. judicial duties till about a fortnight before his death. Mr. Brandon was commissioner to administer Caths in the Supreme Court of Judicature. married to the daughter of Mr. John Michael, of Wandsworth, and he leaves four children. He was buried at the Barnes Cemetery on the 21st

Mr. JOSEPH STEPHENSON LAWSON, solicitor (of the firm of Bulmer & licer ena vel diam Gentlemen, I am very sorry to habrand in ordegtu tine administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature. Harisoistant-judge, Mr. Woodthorpe Brandon, etter awent there eatness & Gwillim), of Marlborough, has been elected Town Clerk of that til bin madministration Sre justice and this coure, having being connected who is also clerk of the Peace for "Wiltshire." Here twilim was admitted

a solicitor in 1876. He was perfectly familiar with the practice of the court, and during the Mr. Adolphus EDGAR CHURCH, solicitor, of Colchester, has been elected e tiener, and those who knew him have lost al overy exeryleniti aina intelligent solicitor, of Colchester. He was admitted a solicitor in 1855, and he is oriencarabes here. The Corporation have been the rassistieren van een and Starck Barnel.eaner. Church eine second one of met John Heary Church, public servant. I can only express, in the name of the practitioners of Essex.

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


UNITY, Owmfrwdore Inn, Cwmfrwdore, nr Pontnewynydd, Pontypool, Monof Worcester, has been appointed by the High Sheriff of Worcestershire

mouth March 14 (Mr. William Edward Everitt) to be Under-Sheriff of that county for the UNION BURIAL SOCIETY, Well and Bucket, Bethnal Green rd. March 12 ensuing year. Mr. Hughes is also under - sheriff for the city of

London Gazette.-TUESDAY, March 22. Worcester. He was admitted a solicitor in 1859.


LIMITED IN CHANCERY. Mr. EDWARD LEADBITTER, solicitor of the firm of Leadbitter &

ABERCORRIS SLATE AND SLAB Co., LIMITED.- Creditors are required, on or before Hammond), of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, has been appointed by the High April 19, to send their names and addresses, and particulars of their debts or Sheriff of Northumberland (Mr. Ralph Atkinson) to be Under-Sheriff of

claims, to Edgar Ashworth Harvey, 18, St. Dunstan's hill. Tuesday, May 3, at that county for the ensuing year. Mr. Leadbitter was admitted a

11, is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon debts and claims

BOYTHORPE COLLIERY CO., LIMITED.-By an order made by Stirling, J., dated solicitor in 1860.

March 12, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Church & Co, Bed

ford row, solors for petners Mr. JOHN BASELEY Tooke Hales, solicitor and notary (of the firm of

DEAN & CO, LIMITED.-Petn for winding up, presented March 19, directed to be
Hapsell & Hales), of Norwich, has been appointed by the High Sheriff of heard before Stir ing. J., on April 2. Torr & Co, Bedford row, agents for
Norfolk (Sir Alfred Jodrell), to be Under-Sheriff of that county for the Simpson. Leeds, solor for petners
ensuing year. Mr. Hales was admitted a solicitor in 1874. He is deputy. | Thomas WEBB & SONS, LIMITED. By an order made by Chitty. J., dated March

14, it was ordered that tbe above be wound up. Field & Co., Lincolo's inn fields, registrar of the Archdeaconry of Norwich.

agents for Barlow & Co. Birmingham, colors for petners Mr. John STOKELL Dodds, Attorney-General of Tasmania, has been

VICTORIA GRAVING DOCK Co., LIMITED.-Petn for winding up, presented March

21, directed to be heard before North, J., on April 2. Gedge & Co, Old Palace appointed a Puisne Judge of the Supreme Court of that Colony. Mr. yard, petners in person Justice Dodds was born in 1848, and he was called to the bar in Tasmania

UNLIMITED IN OHANCERY. in 1872. He is a representative of Tasmania at the present Colonial BRIGHTON DISTRICT. TRAMWAYS Co.-Stirling, J., has fixed Thursday, March 31, Conference

at 12, at his chambers, for appointment of official liquidator

FRIENDLY SOOIETIES DISSOLVED. Mr. John STEWART LAURIB, solicitor (of the firm of Roberts & Laurie), RENEWED PARWICH FEMALE FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Schoolroom, Parwich, Derby. of Beaumaris and Llangefni, has been appointed by the High Sheriff of

March 16 of Anglesey (Sir Robert William Bulkeley) to be Under-Sheriff of that county for the ensuing year. Mr. Laurie was admitted a solicitor in 1882. His partner, Mr. John Rice Roberts, is town clerk of Beamauris.

Mr. WILLIAM ALEXANDER BAILLIE HAMILTON, barrister, has been appointed to act as secretary to the Colonial Conference. Mr. Hamilton

CREDITORS' NOTICES. is the eldest son of the late Admiral William Alexander Baillie Hamilton.

CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. He was born in 1844, and he was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in

Michaelmas Term, 1872. He has been for many years & clerk in the

London Gazette.- FRIDAY, March 11.
Colonial Office. He was private secretary to Mr. James Lowther when WARDE, THOMAS, Ackworth, York, Joiner. April 16. Thompson v Warde,
Chief Secretary for Ireland, and he is now private secretary to the Secretary

Cbitty, J. Leader, St. Paul's churchyard of State for the Colonien.

London Gazette.- TUESDAY, March 15.

DENISON, WILLIAM, Kingston upon Huil, Wine Merchant. April 15. Cameron Mr. J. G. DALZELL, solicitor, of 12, Clement’s-inn, has been appointed

v Denison, Stirling, J. Shearman, New inn, Strand a Commissioner for Affidavits.

London Gazette.-FRIDAY, March 18.
CROCKER, JAMES, Field pl, Clerkenwell, Cabmaster. April 16. Clarke v Crocker,

Chitty, J. Martin, London Wall

GRUNDY, THOMAS, Grange, Lancaster, Geut. April 20. Grundy v Grundy,
CHARLES BUTLIN and GEORGE PARR, solicitors (Butlin & Parr), of

Chitty, J. Mellor, Oldham

TALBOTT, HENRY JOHN, Stanningfield Hall, Suffolk, Farmer. April 16. King Nottingham. The said George Parr will in future carry on the said v Chick, North, J. Crossfield & Co, Hackney rd business in copartnership with Herbert Charles Butlin (son of the said

London Gazette.- TUESDAY, March 22. Charles Butlin), under the style or firm of Parr & Butlin. March 11. BETTS, WILLIAM, Diss, Norfolk. April 19. Bockett v Campbell, Chitty, J. RANDOLPH CHAMBERLAIN and John DAVID BOYERS LEWIS, solicitors

Woolley, Uhancery lane (Chamberlain & Lewis), of 20, Bucklersbury. March 12.

BOWEY, ANN ROCHESTER, Seaham Harbour, Durham, Innkeeper. April 21.

Scott v Bowey, North, J. Wetherell, Sunderland
[Gazette, March 18.] HERDMAN, THOMAS, Simonburn, Northumberland, Cartwright. April 20. Herd-

man v Herdman, Chitty, J. Baty, jun, Hexham
TAYLOR, MARY ANN, Romford, Essex. April 21. Turpin v Pain, Chitty, J. Hunt,

St Swithin's lane



At a meeting of the London Guarantee and Accident Company (Limited) NOTICES TO CREDITORS UNDER TRUSTEES RELIEF ACT, for insertion in the

London Gasette or any newspaper, should be sent to Harrison and Sons, Pubheld on Tuesday, the directors reported that the new premiums for 1886

lishers London Gazette, 45, St. Martin's-lane, W.0. The Gazette is published every were £16,759 10s. 5d. The premium income for the year, less bonus and Tuesday and Friday.-[ADVT.] rebates to assured and re-assurances, was $42,912 188. 11d., and the interest on investments $4,278 78. 2d. The claims amounted to

UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. CAP. 35. $20,090 17s.


London Gazette.-FRIDAY, March 11.
ANDREW, ALFRED, Northampton, Solicitor. April 1. Andrew & Smith, North-


ARTHUR, REAR-ADMIRAL WILLIAM, O.B., Virginia Water, Surrey. April 21.

Langham & Son, Eastbourne

ASHWORTH, MARY ANNE, Belfield Mill, nr Rochdale. April 8. Jacksons & Godby,


BARLOW, FRANCIS, Montagu sq. Esq. April 12. Bowlings & Co, Essex st
No. 1.
No. 2.

CHITTY. BRAITHWAITE, THOMAS, Delaney st, Camden Town, Barrister at Law. April 18*

Beddoe, Hereford
Mon., Mar. 28 Mr. Jackson Mr. Godfrey Mr. Clowes Mr. King

Pemberton Ward

BUCKMASTER, SARAH, Piccadilly. April 1. Rogers & Co, Victoria st, Westminster Wednesday 80 Carrington Godfrey


BUNKAR, THOMAS, Plymouth, Gent. April 19. Gidley & Son, Plymouth
Thursday .. 31 Lavie


Fri., April 1 Beal

COLEY, HENRY FRANCIS, Cheltenham, Esq. May 1. Ticehurst & Sons, Chel-

tenham Saturday... 2 Pugh

Pemberton Ward

COSIER, ROBERT ARNOLD, Grosvenor st, Esq. April 10. Baker & Co, Lincoln's
Mr. Justice Mr. Justice Mr. Justice

inn fields

DAVIDSON, ROBERT, Wardie, Edinburgh, Sub Accountant. April 30. Lyne & Monday, March 28 Mr. Lavie Mr. Pugh

Mr. Koe

Holman, Gt Winchester et
Carrington Beal

Jackson EAST, ELIZABETH, Bessom st, New Cross. April 17. Ruddle, Greenwich rd


March 31. Langdon,

FLOWERS, THOMAS, Beachampton, Bucks, Farmer.


Friday, April



GLOSSOP, CAROLINE, Martin st, Sheffield. April 23. Vickers & Co, Sheffield
Carrington Beal


HOPE, HANNAH, Fulshaw, Chester. May 4. Lawson, Manchester
HARTLEY, JOSEPH, Barrow in Furness. April 20. Morgan & Nalder, Barrow in


HEADLAM, WILLIAM, West Hartlepool, Gent. April 20. Fryer, West Hartlepool WINDING UP NOTICES.

HAMMOND, MATTHEW, Salford, Licensed Victualler. April 16. Slater & Co,

London Gazette.-FRIDAY, March 18.

HOPKINS. THOMAS MEREDITH, Bedwardine, Worcester. April 26.

Jeffery, Worcester

HUTTON, CHARLES, Halifax, Merchant. April 23. Walshaw, Halifax sented March 14, directed to be heard before North, J., on Saturday, March 26.

IRELAND, CAROLINE, Priory ter, Cheltenham. April 1. Gale, Cheltenham
Hayne, Finsbury sq, solor for petners
CLARIDGE'S HOTEL, LIMITED.-Petn for winding up, presented March 16, directed

KING, JOHN, New ter, Islington. April 9. Lickorish & Bellord, Queen Victo be heard before Stirling, J., on March 26. Cutler & Co, King st, St James's, KNAPP, MARY LEIGH, Shanklin, I.W. April 20. Western & Sons, Essex st, stoler BECOAT AND CLAY CO., LIMITED.-The judge has, by an order dated MARSHAT, BENJAMIN, Emsworth, Hants, Gent. April 11. Blake, Portes






Marchas appointed Thomas Stephen Evans, T. Bucheles baryoticial liquidator MARIOR, IM BEYT ANN, Das Worth, rd, Hounslow. April so. Venning & Co,

« PreviousContinue »