Page images
PDF
EPUB

TURNER, GEORGE, Old Radford, Nottingham, Carter. Nottingham. Pet Oct 27.
Ord Nov 5

Nov 6

TURVEY, HENRY, Abingdon, Berks, Carpenter. Oxford. Pet Nov 1. Ord Nov 6
VARNEY, ALFRED, Ramsgate, Baker. Canterbury. Pet Nov 4. Ord Nov 5
WADDINGTON, JOHN, Colne, Lancashire, Joiner. Burnley. Pet Oct 15. Ord
WAITE, WILLIAM, Bradford, Confectioner. Bradford. Pet Nov 4. Ord Nov 4
WAYRE, ALEXANDER, Oxford st, Manufacturing Furrier. High Court. Pet Oct
9. Ord Nov 5
WEBSTER, HENRY CARPENTER, Bodmin, Cornwall, Tailor. Truro. Pet Oct 16.
Ord Nov 5
WOOD, THOMAS, Nuneaton, Warwick, Publican. Coventry. Pet Sept 15. Ord
Nov 5
WILLIAMS, ROBERT, Dolbenmaen, Carnarvon, Farmer. Bangor. Pet Oct 27.
Ord Nov 6
YOUNG, EDWARD, Dewsbury, Yorks, Dyer. Dewsbury. Pet Oct 19. Ord Nov 4
YEADON, ARTHUR, Batley, Yorks, Flock Merchant. Dewsbury. Pet Oct 30. Ord
Nov 4
The following amended notice is substituted for that published in the
London Gazette of Oct 5.
WOTTON, JOHN ENDACOTT, West Bromwich, House Painter. Oldbury. Pet Sept
20. Ord Sept 28

SALES OF ENSUING WEEK.

Nov 16.-Messrs. HOWELL, SON, & BONNIN, at the Mart, at 2 p.m., Leasehold
Properties (see advertisement, November 6, p. 6).

Nov 16.-Messrs. PHILIP D. TUIKETT & Co., at the Mart, at 1 p.m., Freehold
Premises (see advertisement, November 6, p. 6).

SECRECY.

Nov 16.-Mr. WALTER KNIGHT, at the Mason's-hall Tavern, Leasehold Licensed
Property (see advertisement, this week, p. 4).

Nov 17.-Messrs. HOBSON, RICHARDS, & CO., at the Mart, at 2 p.m., Freehold
Estates (see advertisement, this week, p. 4).

Nov 19.-Messrs. BAKER & SONS, at the Mart, at 2 p.m., Freehold and Leasehold
Properties (see advertisement, November 6, p. 6).

BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, AND DEATHS.

BIRTHS.

LEATHAM.-Nov. 4, at the Red House, Wentbridge, Yorkshire, the wife of
Claude Leatham, solicitor, of a son.
SOLOMON.-Nov. 5, at 22, Linden-gardens, W., the wife of Joseph Maurice
Solomon, of Lincoln's-inn, barrister-at-law, of a son.
MARRIAGE.
CURNOW-MARSHALL.-Sept. 23, at Sydney, John Roberts Curnow, solicitor, of
Warwick, to Katharine Celia, daughter of Captain G. S. Marshall, Cazenove-
road, Stoke Newington.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[blocks in formation]
[merged small][graphic][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small]

SAFES from 1 to 5 Guineas. STRONG ROOMS from 7 to 80 Guineas per Annum.

GUARDED NIGHT AND DAY.

WRITING, TELEPHONE, AND WAITING ROOMS FOR LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

The Public are invited to inspect this Valuable Stronghold; Card of Admission post-free on application to the Manager.

61 & 62,

SCHWEITZER'S

CHANCERY LANE, LONDON.

COCOATINA

Anti-Dyspeptic Cocoa or Chocolate Powder.

Guaranteed Pure Soluble Cocoa of the Finest Quality

with the excess of fat extracted.

The Faculty pronounce it" the most nutritious, perectly digestible beverage for Breakfast, Luncheon, or Supper, and invaluable for Invalids and Children."

[blocks in formation]

To Her Majesty, the Lord Chancellor, the Whole of
the Judicial Bench, Corporation of London, &c.

Highly commended by the entire Medical Press. Being without sugar, spice, or other admixture, it suits all palates keeps for years in all climates, and is four times the strength of cocoas THICKENED yet WEAKENED with starch, &c., and IN REALITY CHEAPER than such ROBES Mixtures.

Made instantaneously with iling water, a teaspoonful to a Breakfast Cup, costing less than a halfpenny. COCOATINA A LA VANILLE is the most delicate, digestible, cheapest Manilla Chocolate, and may be taken when richer chocolate is prohibited.

FOR QUEEN'S COUNSEL AND BARRISTERS.
SOLICITORS' GOWNS.

Law Wigs and Gowns for Registrars, Town Clerks,
and Clerks of the Peace.

In tins at 1s. 6d., 3s., 5s. 6d., &c., by Chemists and CORPORATION ROBES, UNIVERSITY AND CLERGY GOWNS
Grocers.

[blocks in formation]

UNTEARABLE LETTER
COPYING BOOKS.

HOWARD'S PATENT.

Stronger and more durable than any other
Letter Copying Books now made
THE COPYING BOOK FOR THE PROFESSION.
PRICE LIST UPON APPLICATION

WODDERSPOON & CO.,

7, SERLE STREET, AND 1, PORTUGAL STREET, LINCOLN'S INN, W.C.

[blocks in formation]

(By Order)

Secretary (pro tem.) Winchester House, Old Broad Street, E.C., November 10, 1886.

The Mortgage Insurance Corporation, Limited.

Incorporated under the Companies' Acts, 1862 to 1886,
whereby the liability of the Shareholders is limited
to the amount unpaid on their Shares.

SHARE CAPITAL, £2,000,000,
First Issue of £1,000,000,

(Of which £250,000 has been subscribed by the
Founders),

IN 100,000 SHARES OF £10 EACH.
Payable 10s. per Share on Application, 10s. per Share
on Allotment, and £1 on the 15th February, 1887.
It is not intended to make further Calls.
DIRECTORS.

The Right Hon. E. PLEYDELL BOUVERIE, Chairman.
Sir SYDNEY H. WATERLOW, Bart., Deputy Governor
Union Bank of London, Deputy Chairman.

J. SPENCER BALFOUR, Esq., Deputy Chairman Assets
Realization Company, Limited.

THOS. CHARRINGTON, Esq., Director Metropolitan
Life Assurance Society.

ARTHUR HENTY, Esq. (Messrs. Henty & Sons,
Bankers), Worthing.

HENRY HONEY, Esq. (late Messrs. Honey, Hum-
phreys, & Co.), Wyvelsfield, Chislehurst.

Sir HENRY E. KNIGHT. Alderman, Chairman South-
wark and Vauxhall Water Company.
EDWARD NORMAN, Esq. (Messrs. Martin & Co.), 68,
Lombard Street, E.C.

LEOPOLD SALOMONS, Esq., Director Employers'
Liability Assurance Corporation.

VINCENT B. TRITTON, Esq., Director City of London
Fire Insurance Company.

BANKERS.

Messrs. MARTIN & Co., 68, Lombard Street, E.C. UNION BANK OF LONDON, LIMITED, Chancery Lane, Regent Street, and Charing Cross Branches. SOLICITORS.

Messrs. LINKLATER, HACKWOOD, ADDISON, & BROWN, 7. Walbrook, E.C.

Messrs. BAKER, BLAKER, & HAWES, 117, Cannon

Street, E.C.
AUDITORS

subject to such conditions as the Directors may con-
sider proper having regard to the risk undertaken.
The Corporation is prepared to offer at once such
terms as it is believed will secure an immediate, large,
and profitable business.

No contracts have been entered into and no pro-
motion money has been or will be paid.

The founders have subscribed the first £250,000 of the ordinary Share Capital, and pay all the preliminary expenses, except law charges and usual brokerage; they will be entitled to receive upon their Founders' Shares as distinct from the Ordinary Shares, one-half the nett profits after payment of 7 per cent. on the Ordinary Shares, and after providing for a Reserve Fund, the remaining half will be available for increased dividends on the Ordinary Shares.

If no allotment is made the application money will be returned in full, and in case a smaller amount is allotted than is applied for the excess paid on application will be applied in payment of the allotment

[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

RESTS in LANDED or FUNDED PROPERTY or other Securities and Annuities PURCHASED, or Loans or Annuities thereon granted, by the EQUITABLE REVERSIONARY INTEREST SOCIETY (LIMITED), 10, Established Lancaster-place, Waterloo Bridge, Strand. Capital, £500,000. Interest on Loans may be capitalized. F. S. CLAYTON, { Joint C. H. CLAYTON, Secretaries

1835.

ACCIDENTS OF DAILY LIFE

INSURED AGAINST BY

THE NEW ZEALAND LAND MORT- THE RAILWAY PASSENGERS' ASSURANCE COMPANY

THE

GAGE COMPANY, Limited.

Capital £2,000,000. fully subscribed.
£200,000 paid up. Reserve Fund, £5,000.

The Company's loans are limited to first-class free-
hold mortgages. The Debenture issue is limited to
the uncalled capital.

DIRECTORS.
Sir WILLIAM T. POWER,
K.C.B.
THOS.
Esq.

HOME
H. J. BRISTOW, Esq.
W. K. GRAHAM, Esq.
FALCONER LARKWORTHY,
Esq.

ARTHUR M. MITCHISON,
Esq.

C.M.G.

RUSSELL,

Sir EDWARD W. STAF-
FORD, K.C.M.G.
Chairman of Colonial Board-
The Hon. Sir FREDK. WHITAKER, K.C.M.G., M.L.C.,
late Premier of New Zealand.

The Directors are issuing Terminable Debentures
bearing interest at 4 per cent. for three years, and
42 per cent. for five years and upwards. Interest half-
yearly by Coupons.

A. M. MITCHISON, Managing Director.
Leadenhall-buildings, Leadenhall-st., London, E.C

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

ASSURANCE SOCIETY,
FLEET STREET, LONDON.-Instituted 1823.
Assets on 31st December, 1885...
£5,248,223
Income for the Year 1885
£435,476
£14,536,593
Amount paid in claims to 31st Dec., 1885
Reversionary Bonus allotted for the five
years ending 31st Dec., 1884 ...
Reversionary Bonuses hitherto allotted
The Expenses of Management, including Commis-

Messrs. BROADS, PATERSON, & Co, 1, Walbrook, E.C. sion, are about 44 per cent. of the Income.

TEMPORARY OFFICES.

WINCHESTER HOUSE, OLD BROAD STREET, E.C.

SECRETARY (pro tem.).
B. G. KINNEAR, Esq.
PROSPECTUS.

This Company has been incorporated for the purpose of granting Insurances to the holders of Mortgages, Mortgage Debentures, Mortgage Debenture Stock, and other securities against loss of principal and interest.

Although advances upon mortgages justly occupy the first rank among investments, experience (particularly during the last few years) has demonstrated that, in spite of the exercise of every ordinary precaution, it is impossible to make adequate provision against loss in every case. The Directors confidently believe, and have been assured by many Solicitors and other competent authorities, that in introducing the system of assurance to mortgage investments, they will supply a valuable element of security of which advantage is certain to be largely taken.

It is believed that the operations of this Corporation, whilst very profitable to its Shareholders, will be of the utmost advantage to all who are interested, either as Owners or Mortgagees of property, and especially so to Trustees. The Policies of this Corporation will assure and strengthen the relative position of borrowers and lenders, and will remove the element of doubt and uncertainty which, as above stated, often attends even the best class of mortgage business. Prudent lenders will naturally desire that their interest shall be regularly paid, and their securities enhanced by the guarantee of a large and powerful company, whilst borrowers who are prepared to assure their obligations, will necessarily be able to procure better terms as to interest and otherwise than would be obtainable without such guarantee.

The field open to the operations of the Corporation is practically illimitable. It is believed that the effect of the additional security offered to Mortgagees and others will largely increase the present volume of Mortgage transactions, but it may be safely stated that, assuming only a small per centage of the property at present the subject of Mortgage were assured with the Corporation, it would yield an amount of business which would return a large dividend to the Shareholders.

The Capital paid up will be invested in readily available and high-class securities and will furnish, with the amount uncalled, a guarantee for the engagements which the Corporation may enter into. Every proposal for insurance will be considered on its merits, and will be accepted at such rates and

£690,946 £6.889,937

The limits of free travel and residence have been largely extended, and rates of extra premium reduced.

(ESTABLISHED 1849),

64, CORNHILL, LONDON.

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

Southampton-buildings, Chancery-lane. THREE per CENT. INTEREST allowed on DEPOSITS, repayable on demand.

TWO per CENT. INTEREST on CURRENT ACCOUNTS celculated on the minimum monthly balances, when not drawn below £100.

The Bank undertakes for its Customers, free of
Charge, the Custody of Deeds, Writings, and other
Securities and Valuables; the collection of Bills or
Exchange, Dividends, and Coupons; and the purchase
and sale of Stocks, Shares, and Annuities. Letters of
Credit and Circular Notes issued.

The BIRKBECK ALMANACK, with full particu-
lars, post-free, on application.
FRANCIS RAVENSCROFT, Manager.
COLLEGE, Cambridge.

Life CAVENDI

Loans granted on security of Policies,
Interests, Reversions, and Borough and County
Rates, as well as on other approved Securities.
Life Interests and Reversions are purchased.
Claims paid immediately on proof of death and
title.

Commission allowed to Solicitors and others on
Assurances effected through their introduction.
Prospectus and Form of Proposal sent on applica-
tion to the Actuary.

[blocks in formation]

216, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON, W.C.
The Funds in hand and Capital Subscribed amount to
£1,900,000 sterling.
Chairman-JAMES CUDDON, Esq., of the Middle
Temple, Barrister-at-Law.
Deputy-Chairman-CHARLES PEMBERTON, Esq. (Lee
& Pembertons), Solicitor, 44, Lincoln's-inn-fields.
The Directors invite attention to the New Form of
Life Policy, which is free from all conditions.
Policies of Insurance granted against the contin-
gency of Issue at moderate rates of Premium.
The Company ADVANCES Money on Mortgage of
Life Interests and Reversions, whether absolute or
contingent.

The Company also purchases Reversions.
Prospectuses, copies of the Directors' Report and
Annual Balance Sheet, and every information, sent
post-free on application to

FRANK MCGEDY, Actuary and Secretary.

PRESIDENT:

[blocks in formation]

THE STANDARD IIFE ASSURANCE Prim, partly returned in salary. Apply to Mr.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][merged small][subsumed][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

act for the purpose of hearing and determining appeals, and also for the purpose of Lords of Appeal in Ordinary taking their seats and the oaths, during any prorogation of Parliament." During a prorogation, therefore, only Lords of Appeal in Ordinary may take the oaths, and as Lord BRAMWELL and Lord HERSCHELL are not Lords of Appeal in Ordinary, and had not taken the oaths after the last dissolution, they cannot take the oaths during a prorogation. This follows from the Parliamentary Oaths Act, 1866, which prescribes that the oath of allegiance set out in that Act (changed in form only by the Promissory Oaths Act, 1868) "shall, in every Parliament, be solemnly and publicly made and subscribed by every member of the House of Peers at the table in the middle of the said House . . . and whilst a full House of Peers is there with their Speaker in his place." And to make assurance doubly sure, it is provided by the concluding portion of section 8 of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1876, "that no business other than the hearing

The Solicitors' Journal and Reporter. and determination of appeals, and matters connected therewith,

LONDON, NOVEMBER 20, 1886.

CURRENT TOPICS.

THREE ORDERS which we print elsewhere complete the arrangements consequent on the retirement of Vice-Chancellor BACON, (which we were enabled to announce last week) by transferring all causes marked for Vice-Chancellor BACON, and also his chief clerks and officers, to Mr. Justice KAY; and by transferring all Mr. Justice KAY'S causes, chief clerks, and officers to Mr. Justice STIRLING; and by transferring all Mr. Justice STIRLING'S causes to Mr. Justi KEKEWICH for trial or hearing only.

WE HAVE this week to announce an appointment which we believe will give general satisfaction. Mr. GEORGE AUGUSTUS CROWDER, Solicitor (of the firm of CROWDERS & VIZARD), of 55, Lincoln's-inn-fields, has been appointed a Chief Clerk in the chambers of Mr. Justice CHITTY, in succession to Mr. ROBERT MARSHALL, resigned. Mr. CROWDER was admitted as of Trinity Term, 1861. It will be remembered that he was chairman of the committee of the Incorporated Law Society appointed in 1881 to consider the report of the Legal Procedure Committee.

THE ARRANGEMENTS consequent on the retirement of Vice-Chancellor BACON have given rise to a migration of leaders probably without parallel. We believe that the following is a correct statement, so far as it goes, of the changes which have occurred :-The Queen's Counsel practising before Mr. Justice KAY will consist of Mr. MARTEN, Mr. INCE (who has migrated from Mr. Justice CHITTY's court), Mr. HORTON SMITH, Mr. MILLAR, and Sir A. WATSON. The Queen's Counsel practising before Mr. Justice STIRLING will consist of Mr. FISCHER, Mr. W. PEARSON, Mr. HEMMING, Mr. GRAHAM HASTINGS, Mr. W. F. ROBINSON, Mr. CROSSLEY, and Mr. BUSH. Mr. BARBER, Q.C., and Mr. WARMINGTON, Q.C., will practise before Mr. Justice KEKEWICH, and Mr. MACLEAN, Q.C., will practise before Mr. Justice CHITTY.

THE FOLLOWING are the names and dates of call to the bar of the new Queen's Counsel:-Six members of the Equity Bar: Mr. EDWARD CUTLER, 1857; Mr. WILLIAM LATHAM, 1860; Mr. WALTER CHARLES RENSHAW, 1864; Mr. HENRY BURTON BUCKLEY, 1869; Mr. SEWARD BRICE, 1871; and Mr. KENNETH AUGUSTUS MUIR MACKENZIE (Permanent Secretary in the Lord Chancellor's Department, and Clerk of the Crown in Chancery), 1873. Two members of the South-Eastern Circuit: Mr. EMANUEL MAGUIRE UNDERDOWN, 1861, and Mr. GEORGE CANDY, 169. Two members of the Northern Circuit Mr. THOMAS WRITTENBURY WHEELER, 1865, and Mr. LINDSEY MIDDLETON ASPLAND, 1868; and one member of the NorthEastern Circuit: Mr. EDWARD TINDAL ATKINSON, 1870.

[merged small][ocr errors]

and Lords of Appeal in Ordinary taking their seats and the oaths as aforesaid, shall be transacted by the House of Lords during such prorogation." An amending statute will, we presume, be passed to remedy the defect.

cases

TO THE DELIGHT of the impressionable part of the public, and, we think, rather to the surprise of the majority of the legal profession, Mr. Justice BUTT has seen his way to granting a decree of nullity in Scott v. Sebright, on the ground that the petitioner was, at the time of her marriage, incapable of consenting to the marriage contract, and that that contract ought to be avoided on the same grounds as other contracts may be avoided, subject to the qualification that the court avoiding it must watch more jealously than in the case of other contracts the evidence which is tendered in support of the desired avoidance. It may perhaps be questioned whether, in not subjecting SEBRIGHT to examination on certain points, the learned judge quite observed his own qualification, and whether the case does not bear on the face of it something like the judicial sanction of the dissolution of a marriage by mutual consent, although, as Lord PENZANCE eloquently points out in Mordaunt v. Mordaunt (2 P. D., at p. 196), the feature of non-rescission by consent is a feature which belongs to marriage contracts alone among contracts. The question, however, was one of evidence only, and all that can be said is that different facts strike different judges differently. As to the authorities, although no are cited in the judgment, it is well to point out that the books contain at least three cases-Harford v. Morris (2 Hagg. Con. 423), Portsmouth v. Portsmouth (1 Hagg. 356), and Wilkinson v. Wilkinson (4 Notes of Ecclesiastical Cases, 295) in which a marriage has been declared void on the ground of incapacity to consent, not amounting to insanity. Of the three cases Wilkinson v. Wilkinson is the strongest. There a rich infant, incurably imbecile, but whose friends had failed to procure her to be declared lunatic, had been inveigled into a marriage with a cousin "in concert with other parties." The ceremony was hurried, and the bride, when required to say "I will," said "No," till prompted by the clerk and told to use the former words; moreover, when in the vestry, she "took off the ring and threw it down, saying she was not married." The husband was represented but not examined at the trial, his counsel admitting that the wife was undoubtedly unfit to enter into the matrimonial contract, and "leaving the matter in the hands of the court" (Dr. LUSHINGTON), with the result that the decree was granted on the ground that the marriage had been brought about by fraud and circumvention.

A CORRESPONDENT of a contemporary, signing himself "Lincoln's Inn," has accomplished a feat and made a discovery which may well fill his inn with pride. The feat is the reading of "the words of section 13 of 1 & 2 Vict. c. 110," and the discovery is that there is no necessity for "any panic about Re Pope" (34 W. R. 654, 693). Referring to an article which he appears to have written on the 9th of October, he says, "I observe that I stand alone in my opinions therein expressed; and your contemporaries the SOLICITORS' JOURNAL and the Law Journal, and the respective contributors thereto, are wholly at sea amidst what they consider the shoals of the Judgment Acts.

Would you believe it, sir, those valiant journals and their learned contributors occasion their own troubles by not reading the words of section 13 of 1 & 2 Vict. c. 110 which they comment on?" And then he proceeds to state the provisions of this unknown section, the effect of which he states to be that "the in invitum charge which, by that section, is given by the judgment being duly registered, is made thereby equivalent to a voluntary charge made by writing of the debtor under hand-that is to say, the judgment debt, being registered, is, by the statute, made and declared to be an equitable mortgage on the lands-exactly what I (WHO READ THE ACTS I WRITE ABOUT) have stated in the article in question." And he then refers to another unknown Act of 27 & 23 Vict. c. 112, and asks "why purchasers should be in any panic about Re Pope?" It is satisfactory to know that "Lincoln's Inn" has read section 13; and it would have been still more satisfactory if his reading had extended to the observations in the SOLICITORS' JOURNAL on which he comments. What we have endeavoured to shew (with what success our readers must judge) is that there are two totally distinct methods of enforcing a judgment debt against the debtor's land

First, the judgment creditor may obtain execution against the debtor's lands, by suing out an elegit, or by obtaining an order appointing a receiver, or for a commission of sequestration. He can do this without registering either the judgment or the writ or order. In this case he enforces his remedy against the rents and profits of the debtor's land. There is no means by which a purchaser can be certain that the judgment creditor has not obtained

execution.

Secondly, the judgment creditor may obtain a charge on the corpus of the land of the judgment debtor by registering his writ or other process of execution under 27 & 28 Vict. c. 112. In this case a purchaser can ascertain by searching what has been done. Without again discussing the extremely intricate law of judgments and executions, we may point out, for the benefit of "Lincoln's Inn," that the decision in Re Pope (which he surely cannot have read) expressly decided (1) that, where land is actually delivered in execution, it is not necessary to register the execution, except for the purpose of obtaining an order for sale; and (2) that a judgment creditor who has got the land actually delivered in execution is safe as against a purchaser in other words, that the purchaser is not safe as against the execution creditor. Perhaps even "Lincoln's Inn" will now see why there has been "a panic about Re Pope."

ON FRIDAY fortnight the Master of the Rolls announced that the bankruptcy appeal, Ex parte The Official Receiver, In re Morritt, would be re-argued before the full Court of Appeal. The case is one of several relating to bills of sale in which judgment was reserved just before the Long Vacation. One of the questions raised was, whether section 19 of the Conveyancing Act, 1881, which confers on a mortgagee by deed "a power, when the mortgage-money has become due, to sell the mortgaged property," applies to a bill of sale of personal chattels given as security for money. Section 20 provides that the mortgagee shall not exercise the power of sale unless and until notice requiring payment of the mortgage-money has been served on the mortgagor, and default in payment has been made for three months after the service, or interest is in arrear for two months. Section 19 also provides that "the provisions of this Act relating to the foregoing powers, comprised either in this section, or in any subsequent section regulating the exercise of those powers may be varied or extended by the mortgage deed," and in this particular case the bill of sale contained a proviso that the power of sale conferred upon the mortgagee by the Conveyancing Act should be exercisable by him "in every respect as if the 20th section of the said Act had not been enacted." Another question was, whether a mortgagee of chattels has (independently of the Conveyancing Act and of any express power in the deed) an inherent power of sale by virtue of his mortgage in case of default by the mortgagor. The case was argued before the full court on Thursday, the 11th inst., and judg

ment was reserved.

66

duties Lord COLERIDGE has this week intimated an anxious desire for information, was, before the Judicature Acts, styled the Official Solicitor of the High Court of Chancery," and before the Chancery Funds Act "the Solicitor to the Suitors' Fund." His functions, as described in the Second Report of the Legal Departments Commission, were to protect the Suitors' Fund, and to administer, under the direction of the court, so much of it as then came under the spending power of the court. He acted for parties in pauper suits, when so directed by the judge, and for those who, through ignorance or forgetfulness, were guilty of contempt of court by not answering process. Every quarter he visited Holloway Prison, to see and report upon any prisoner of the Court of Chancery, taking up any case requiring assistance. He assisted the Paymaster-General in preparing the Chancery Estimates for Parliament, and acted generally as a solicitor in all cases in which the several Chancery Courts required such services. All these duties he still performs, with the exception of administering so much of the Suitors' Fund as comes under the spending power of the court. He may be also required, under R. S. C., 1883, XXXIII., 9, to act in case of "undue delay" in proceedings under any judgment or order. As solicitor of the court he is the general intermediary for the Lord Chancellor, as president, in respect of a large amount of public business in connection with the courts. It frequently happens that the Official Solicitor is appointed guardian for an infant in cases where a guardian is unfit to act through misconduct, and the judge thinks it desirable to retain a strict hold on the infant's property. But this forms no part of his official duties, though in such cases the existence of a trustworthy officer is a great convenience, and facilitates the exercise of the duties of the judges.

The number of

IF ANY IMPUTATION was intended by the Master of the Rolls, in his recent remarkable speech, against the county court judges on the ground of inefficiency or defective administration of the law, no support for such a charge can be gathered from the results of the appeals from their decisions (apart from their equity, admiralty, and bankruptcy jurisdiction) which are given in the last issue of the Judicial Statistics. appeals from county courts by special case in the year ending the 31st of October, 1885, was 31; and of this number 22 were argued, 10 decisions being affirmed and 12 reversed. Appeals by motion numbered 151, of which 41 were refused, and of the 111 orders nisi granted, 36 only were made absolute, and 74 were discharged. The figures speak for themselves, and shew only 48 successful appeals from the 586,716 decisions of 59 county court judges.

ON THE FORM OF MORTGAGE BILLS OF SALE.
II.

Consideration. The Act of 1882 requires (section 8) that the
bill of sale shall "truly set forth the consideration for which it
Act of 1878, s. 8, by the addition of the word "
was given," differing only from the corresponding provision in the
truly." It
hardly requires the authority of Bowen, L.J. (Ex parte Johnson,
Re Chapman, 26 Ch. D., at p. 348), to enable one to see that the
difference in language is immaterial, and that the Act of 1878 re-
quires the consideration to be stated truly.

The cases shew that the statement of the consideration need not if it be substantially accurate (Hughes v. Little, 35 W. R. 36), be literally accurate; that it satisfies the requirements of the Acts and if it states, either in legal or business language, the true effect of what actually took place: see the remarks of Bowen, L.J., Ex porte Johnson, ubi sup. ; of Brett, L.J., The Credit Co. v. Pott (6Q. B. D., at p. 298). "The real principle of the form is that, whatever may be the consideration for the sum of money secured by the bill of sale, a first sum shall be stated therein in figures, and in direct terms" (per Brett, M.R., Davis v. Burton, 11 Q. B. D., at p. 540).

Most of the cases where the consideration is incorrectly stated may be grouped under two heads-first, where the consideration is expressed to be paid "now" or "on or immediately before the execution of these presents," and the whole or part of the conTHE OFFICIAL SOLICITOR of the Supreme Court, as to whose sideration is paid some time before the execution of the bill

of sale, or no money is actually paid; secondly, where the consideration is expressed to be paid to A. and the whole or part is really paid to B.

In cases of the first class the bill of sale was held good, in Ex parte Allam, Re Munday (14 Q. B. D. 43), where the debtor gave a bill of sale for the sum advanced, and, upon its being discovered that it was invalid owing to its offending against the provisions of the Acts, gave a fresh bill four days after the execution of the first bill, which was thereupon cancelled; in Ex parte Johnson, Re Chapman (32 W. R. 393, 26 Ch. D. 338), where part of the loan was made four days before the execution of the bill of sale on the undertaking of the debtor to execute a bill of sale if required; in Ex parte Bolland, Re Roper (31 W. R. 102, 21 Ch. D. 543), where no money actually passed, but the sum expressed to be paid was a sum owing by the grantor to the grantee for unpaid purchase-money; in The Credit Co. v. Pott (29 W. R. 326, 6 Q. B. D. 295), where no money passed, there was a recital of an intended loan, and the amount of the loan was the sum found due by the grantor to the grantee on a stated account; the effect of the transaction in each of the two latter cases really being payment by the grantor of the money due by him, and an immediate advance of the same sum to him by the grantee. On the other hand, the bill of sale was held to be invalid in Ex parte Berwick, Re Young (29 W. R. 292), where the loan had been made by instalments extending over eighteen months, the last of which was paid three months before the bill of sale was given.

In cases of the second class the consideration is truly said to be paid to the grantor if it is by his direction, at the time of the advance, paid so as to satisfy existing debts then due from him (see the remarks of Jessel, M. R., and Brett, L.J., Ex parte Firth, Re Cowburn, 19 Ch. D. 419; Hamlyn v. Betteley, 29 W. R. 956, 5 C. P. D. 327), or, apparently, if it is paid for any purpose by his direction (see Re Cann, Ex parte Hunt, 13 Q. B. D., where it will be observed that part of the costs which were paid on the execution of the bill of sale had not become due). The bill was even upheld where, immediately after the payment of the consideration, the grantor applied part of it, pursuant to an agreement entered into at the time, giving the bill of sale in payment of a debt bond fide due by him to the grantee: Ex parte National Mercantile Bank, Re Haynes (28 W. R. 248, 15 Ch. D. 42), a case decided under the Act of 1878; if it had fallen under the Act of 1882 the collateral agreement would have made the sale bad: see ante, p. 41.

void, except as against the grantor: see the Act of 1882, ss. 4, 5.

An interminable controversy might be raised on the meaning of the words "specifically described," but fortunately they have been decided to mean that the inventory must describe the things as a business man would describe them: see remarks of Lindley, L.J., in Roberts v. Roberts (13 Q. B. D., at p. 806). It is unnecessary to state in what house the chattels are: Ex parte Hill, Re Lane (17 Q. B. D. 74).

These provisions effectually prevent a mortgage of after-acquired chattels, unless they are acquired in substitution for those comprised in the bill of sale which become worn out: Consolidated Credit Co. v. Gosney (34 W. R. 106, 16 Q. B. D. 24). It should, perhaps, be stated that where a bill of sale mortgages both chattels in possession and after-acquired chattels, the invalid provisions as to the after-acquired chattels do not invalidate the mortgage of the property in possession: Roberts v. Roberts (32 W. R. 605, 13 Q. B. D. 794), overruling Levy v. Polack (W. N., 1885, 76). These provisions are subject to the important exceptions of (1) any growing crops separately assigned or charged where such crops were actually growing at the time when the bill of sale was executed; (2) any fixtures separately assigned or charged, and any plant or trade machinery, where such fixtures, plant, or trade machinery are used in, attached to, or brought upon any land, farm, factory, workshop, shop, house, warehouse, or other place in substitution for any of the like fixtures, plant, or trade machinery specifically described in the schedule to such bill of sale see the Act of 1882, s. 6.

The words "separately assigned " in this section have reference to the 4th section of the Act of 1878. As to growing crops, they mean "not assigned together with any interest in the land on which they grow." As to fixtures, "not assigned together with a freehold or leasehold interest in any land or building to which they are annexed."

It should be observed that a grant of after-acquired chattels passes only an equitable interest, and that, therefore, if, after they come into existence, and before the grantee takes possession, some other person, without notice of the grantee's interest, acquires a legal interest in them, the title of the grantee is ousted: Joseph v. Lyons (33 W. R. 145, 15 Q. B. D. 280), Hallas v. Robirson (33 W. R. 426, 15 Q. B. D. 289).

**There is an omission of some words in a sentence in our previous article at the top of page 41, second column. The latter part of the sentence should read, "were intended to apply solely to the case where the mortgage was by demise, or whether they would also apply to the case of a mortgage in fee, and whether they apply to the implied tenancy of the mortgagor created by the mortgage, or only to the express tenancy created by the attorn.

On the other hand, where part of the consideration was paid to, or retained by, the grantee as bonus: Re Williams, Ex parte Pearce (32 W. R. 187, 25 Ch. D. 656); as commission on the loan: Hamilton v. Chaine (7 Q. B. D. 1, 319); for the sake of providing for the rent subsequently becoming due of the house where the chattels were: Ex parte Rolph, Re Spindler (19 Ch. D. 98); for interest and expenses: Ex parte Charing Cross Advancement." and Deposit Bank, Re Parker (29 W. R. 204, 16 Ch. D. 35); or if the costs of the grantee's solicitor, including costs of registration, are retained by him out of the consideration: Ex parte Firth, Re Cowburn (19 Ch. D. 419) overruling Ex parte Challinor (29 W. R. 205, 16 Ch. D. 260), the consideration was held not to be truly expressed. In all the cases where part of the consideration is retained by the grantee for the purpose of future application, the consideration is not truly stated, not only because it is stated to be paid to the grantor, but also because it is stated "to be now paid": Ex parte Rolph, Re Spindler (19 Ch. D. 98). The consideration was held not to be truly stated where the bill secured repayment of advances thereby recited to be made to the grantor, but which were really made to his firm: Ex parte Carter, Re Threappleton (12 Ch. D. 908). The consideration was held to be sufficiently stated in the words, "In consideration of the grantee having, at the request of the grantor, become guarantee, and having signed a promissory note for the payment of a sum of £45, obtained by the grantor from B., of which £32 or thereabouts is now owing": Hughes v. Little (17 Q. B. D. 204), confirmed on this point on appeal (35 W. R. 36); and where part of the consideration was a transaction relating to promissory notes which were incorrectly stated to be bills of exchange: Roberts v. Roberts (32 W. R. 605, 13 Q. B. D. 794).

Parcels.-Personal chattels must be specifically described in a schedule-inventory contained in a schedule to the bill of sale, and the grantor must be the true owner thereof at the time of the execution of the bill of sale, otherwise the bill of sale will be

CONCERNING SEARCHES.
(XV.) JUDGMENTS.

II. THE MODERN LAW OF JUDGMENTS (continued). Registration of judgments.-By section 19 of 1 & 2 Vict. c. 110, no judgment of any of the said "superior courts "-i.e., at Westminster-" nor any decree or order in any court of equity, nor any order in bankruptcy or lunacy, shall, by virtue of this Act, affect any lands," &c., as to purchasers unless and until registered in the Court of Common Pleas in the manner therein prescribed, in the name of "the person whose estate is intended to be affected thereby." (Semble, therefore, that if a defendant was sued as trustee, the registration should be in the name of the cestui que trust, against whom a purchaser would search.)

The section does not mean that judgments shall, when registered, affect lands as from entry of judgment; its effect is to cut down the prior sections which bind lands as from entry of judgment and to affect purchasers only from the time of registration (Hargrave v. Hargrave, 23 Beav. 484).

The statute 1 & 2 Vict. c. 110 did not repeal the Statute of Westminster 2 or the Docket Act (ante, p. 25), so that, as section 19 applies only to the rights given" by virtue of this Act," it was, apparently, still open to a creditor to docket his judgment under

« PreviousContinue »