Page images
PDF
EPUB

to account, either at the times actually agreed upon, or at the times fixed by the custom of trade, or within a reasonable time, and he was bound not to state his accounts in such a way as to mislead the principals into supposing that he had not received moneys which he had, in fact, received. If, having received money which he ought to have accounted for to his principals, he used it for his own purposes, and gave them misleading accounts to conceal what he had done, he was guilty of a gross fraud. On the evidence his lordship was of opinion that the present bankrupt had acted in this way, and, whether what he had done was an indictable offence or not, it was a gross fraud. It might not, in the strict sense of the words, amount to a fraudulent breach of trust, but anything more fraudulent in business could not be conceived. Looking at this and the other offences of the bankrupt under section 28, the proper course was absolutely to refuse the bankrupt his discharge. LINDLEY, L.J., could not understand how it could be said that an unpaid creditor could not be aggrieved by the granting of an order of discharge to a bankrupt The effect of the order would be to preclude him from all remedy against the bankrupt and to affect his right to payment out of the estate. He was clearly a 'person aggrieved." On the substance of the case his lordship entirely agreed with the Master of the Rolls. LOPES, L.J., concurred. The question was then raised whether the bankrupt should be ordered to pay the costs of the appeal, and it was urged that it would be contrary to the practice to order an undischarged bankrupt to pay costs, he having no estate. Lord ESHER, M.R., said that the court had jurisdiction to make such an order, and they thought it right to do so in the present case.-COUNSEL, Winslow, Q.C., and Herbert Reed: Cooper Willis, Q.C. SOLICITORS, Parker, Garrett, & Parker; Redpath & Holdsworth.

[ocr errors]

CASES AFFECTING SOLICITORS.

IN THE MATTER OF A SOLICITOR-Q. B. Div., 11th November. Counsel, who appeared for the Incorporated Law Society in this case, said that the solicitor in question had acted for very many years for the trustees of the marriage settlement of Mr. and Mrs. D. Mrs. D. died in 1862, and since then her husband had received the dividends on a sum of £1,340 in Consols from the solicitor, but the latter had received and never paid over the dividends due in July, 1885, and January of the present year. One of the trustees under the marriage settlement had died, and the surviving trustee had resigned last year. In the autumn of 1885 the solicitor had given notice to Mr. D. that he should no longer act under a power of attorney which the trustees had given him to receive the dividends on this sum in Consols; but it appeared that in January last he had obtained payment of the dividend then due and that of the previous half-year. The matter having been placed in the hands of the Incorporated Law Society last April, the solicitor, who had been instructed by Mr. D. to apply to the court for the appointment of new trustees, had expressed his willingness to pay over the two dividends to Mr. D. if it was thought that he ought to do so. The secretary of the society had expressed an opinion that he ought to hand over the moneys, but he had, in fact, retained them. His excuse was that at the time of his having offered to part with the moneys he had not been able to look at his papers, from which it appeared that a larger sum was due to him for moneys advanced to Mr. D. than the amount of the dividends, and also for bills of costs. The solicitor, in his affidavit, had further stated that he was possessed of landed property of the value of £50,000. There was no desire on the part of the Incorporated Law Society to inculpate the solicitor, but they had thought the case, as brought before them when there had been no suggestion of any money having been due from Mr. D. to the solicitor, was one which ought to be brought before the court. It would probably be best that there should be an inquiry into the true facts of the case before a master. The court having intimated that there was no case for such inquiry, counsel briefly addressed the court on behalf of the solicitor, and Lord COLERIDGE, C.J., in giving judgment, said that the application must be dismissed. Before such a charge was made against a solicitor, on whom it might inflict very severe injury, due investigation into the facts ought to be made. The Law Society had made a mistake in not giving notice to the solicitor of their intention to make this application, and he had made a mistake in rot informing them of the claim he had against Canon Drake, who had clearly, at times, received moneys from him before he himself could have received the dividends. MANISTY, J., in concurring, said that the legal profession was under a deep debt of gratitude to the Incorporated Law Society for the work which it had done in purifying the roll of solicitors. There had, in the present case, no doubt been on anxious desire on the part of the society to do its duty, but it had unfortunately failed to take one important step in the matter. Application dismissed without costs.COUNSEL, F. W. Hollams; Wilkinson.-Times.

GALE v. KITE-Q. B. Div., Stephen, J., 6th November.
DUTY OF PARLIAMENTARY AGENT.

This was an action by a Parliamentary agent against a solicitor to recover £47 10s., the amount of his bill of costs for services in connection with an application for the Lyndhurst Gas and Water Provisional Order, 1885. The defence was that the plaintiff had neglected to give to the defendant (who was acting as solicitor for the promoters of the order), notice of the necessity for the publication of the draft order by advertisement before the 25th of April, in accordance with the provisions of the Gas and Water Facilities Act, 1870. In consequence of the order not being so advertised it was unable to be introduced in due course into the Board of

Trade Provisional Orders Confirmation Bill of that session, and the work lapsed. It was contended that it was the duty of the plaintiff as Parliamentary agent to give due notice of each step to be taken by the promoters, and it appeared that he had given notice of the dates of the previous preliminary proceedings. The defendant counter-claimed damages for this alleged negligence. A gentleman from the office of Messrs. Baxters & Co., Parliamentary agents, stated that it was their invariable practice to keep clients informed of the dates. The plaintiff's clerk, on the other hand, stated that on the 14th of April he had called the attention of Mr. Lobb, defendant's clerk, to the necessity of advertising by the 25th of April. Mr. Lobb denied this interview, but both Mr. Gale and his clerk stated that on a subsequent occasion at the Board of Trade Office Mr. Lobb said that he imputed no blame to Mr. Gale. After hearing the evidence, STEPHEN, J., said he must find for the plaintiff for the amount of his claim and also upon the counter-claim. His lordship could not see that it was the special duty of Mr. Gale to keep Mr. Kite informed of this matter. Both Mr. Kite and Mr. Lobb were solicitors. They had this Act before them. That was not all. They had the Board of Trade rules, which specially called attention to the dates. His lordship thought that these things were enough to relieve Mr. Gale of the necessity of giving notice; but beyond that there was evidence of express notice given on the 14th of April by Mr. Sawyer, the plaintiff's clerk. After explaining his reasons for accepting this evidence, his lordship said that in both views of the case, but more especially on the ground that there had been express notice, he gave judgment for the plaintiff.—COUNSEL, C. Crawley; Ēdwyn Jones.—Times. RAVEN v. STEVENS & SONS—Q B. Div., Stephen, J., 11th November. This was an action brought against the publishers of the Law List to recover damages for an alleged libel in that publication, the libel consisting in a mis-statement of the date of the plaintiff's admission as a solicitor. Counsel, in opening the case, said that the plaintiff, Mr. John Raven, was a solicitor, admitted in 1869, and practising at Wandsworth and in London. The defendants duly published in the Law List particulars of his addresses and of his admission until 1885, when they announced him as admitted in 1879. The plaintiff called their attention to the error, but in spite of that they repeated it in 1886. The plaintiff could prove that he had suffered damage from the mistake-among other things the loss of two chancery actions. [STEPHEN, J.-I don't see that the defendants were under any duty to give his admission correctly. The Law List is only a directory.] The Law List is an official publication. It is accepted by your lordships as evidence. [STEPHEN, J.-Is there any Act which makes it evidence?] It is made evidence by 23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, s. 22, that a solicitor is for that year entitled to practice. [STEPHEN, J., after referring to the statute :— There is nothing here about dates. It is only evidence that a person has taken out his certificate.] But if the person is misdescribed he may not be identified with the person who has taken out the certificate. The defendants are the authorized publishers of the list. They are authorized by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue. [STEPHEN, J. But only to publish a list of persons certificated. I don't see that there is a libel or anything like it.] Archibald v. Sweet (5 C. & P.) is an authority that any untrue statement is actionable if injury results from it. [STEPHEN, J. :--I should like to see it. You do not say that there is express malice?] No; but negligence, gross negligence. After some further argument STEPHEN., J., said he was of opinion that there must be judgment of nonsuit with costs, which was entered accordingly. -Times.

:

LAW SOCIETIES.

THE INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY OF LIVERPOOL, The fifty-ninth annual general meeting of this society was held on the 3rd inst. The report of the committee and the treasurer's accounts having been taken as read,

The PRESIDENT (Mr. T. BELLRINGER) delivered an address, in which, after tracing the steps taken towards promoting the objects of the Provincial Sittings Bill, he said:-In August last the objectionable order regulating the trial of witness causes in chancery was annulled, and a new rule passed, which has been circulated amongst the members. The effect of this new rule is that, if, on the 1st of June and 1st of December respectively, ten or more witness causes in the Chancery Division proceeding in the District Registries of Liverpool and Manchester, or either of them, have been set down for trial, special sittings are to be held at Liverpool and Manchester for the trial of such causes. It appears doubtful whether the rule means that, if on either date there are five causes proceeding and set down for trial in Manchester, and five in Liverpool, there will be special sittings at both places or at neither, or whether there will only be a sitting at that place in the registry of which there are ten causes set down. There has not yet been any opportunity of ascertaining how the rule will be interpreted, but it may be reasonably expected that her Majesty's judges will put a liberal construction upon it. You will have observed that the rule deals with only witness causes in the Chancery Division, and does not meet the well-known hardship and increased cost arising from having to try non-witness causes in the same division in London. The success of the new rule depends upon the facilities which may be conferred of administratively dealing with causes in the district registries. The rules for this purpose are doubtless under the consideration of the Rule Committee of her Majesty's judges.

The report of the committee appointed by the Lord Chancellor to

of the Bill.

inquire into the subject of procedure in the Chancery Division was issued a few months since, and will well repay perusal. That committee, which was presided over by the Master of the Rolls (Lord Esher), heard witnesses from Manchester and Liverpool, and the society is indebted to Mr. Isham Gill for the very able manner in which, as the witness from Liverpool, he brought before the committee the present inadequate powers of the district registrars in this division. You will be pleased to know that the committee recommend that in Liverpool and Manchester the district registrars should, in causes and matters proceeding in the district registry, exercise the jurisdiction (as proposed to be regulated) and perform all the duties of a chief clerk; and that, in actions pending in the district registry, the registrar should act as taxing master. Unfortunately, reforms of this nature come but slowly. Seeing that our efforts have so far obtained only the small concession of the new rule, and as the condition of political affairs has prevented Mr. Whitley pressing forward the Bill during the last two Sessions of Parliament, it may be wise to consider whether, before it is again introduced, it should not be reconstructed in such a manner that, while securing by the Bill the facilities and privileges at present enjoyed in the Chancery of the County Palatine, the consolidation of that court with the High Court should form part of the scheme, as recommended by the Judicature Commission in their second report ten years ago, or in the alternative that an extended and common law jurisdiction should be conferred on the Duchy Court. It cannot be too widely known that there are accumulations from suitors' fees in the Duchy Court of over £110,000, which can (may I say should) be made available for the purposes of the main objects Before leaving this subject I desire to refer to the great hardship, inconvenience, and loss caused to suitors by the masters in London (whose decisions are upheld by the judges) refusing to sanction the delivery of pleadings during the Long-the far too long-Vacation. Consider for one moment the effect of this refusal. The arrangement for the trial of civil causes at the assizes held in Manchester and Liverpool, beginning at the end of October, is supposed to be a special concession to meet the demand of these districts for the disposal of actions arising after, or which were not ripe for trial at, the Summer Assizes. Now observe how beautifully that which is granted by one hand is practically withdrawn by the other. An action is commenced, say on the 12th of August and the appearance is entered in London. A defendant wishing to gain time, and having the option, will enter it there rather than in the district registry, where he knows that an order to proceed would be made as a matter of course. The district registry here is not only open for the whole of every day of the Long Vacation, but there is one registrar always in attendance. The result of the masters' and judges' desire for the strict observance of the rest the vacation affords is that under the rule they will not permit any pleadings to be delivered until the 24th of October, the end of the vacation. It is then absolutely impossible to try the action at the assizes in October or beginning of November, and it goes over until February, or six months after the action has been commenced, to the prejudice and injury of the plaintiff, whose only chance of recovering his demand is probably by an early trial. In the meantime, rather than wait this long period, he is glad to compromise his claim even at a sacrifice, or he refers it to arbitration. And yet some of the judges say, "Look at the cause list, and you get an answer to the demand for provincial sittings."

It is to be lamented that political controversies have, amongst other things, prevented pressing and urgent measures, such as the Bill relating to trustees formerly introduced by Mr. Ince and backed by Mr. Whitley, from being dealt with. I refer especially to that part by which it is proposed to authorize trustees to advance up to two-thirds of the value of house property. You are now, no doubt, all acquainted with the absurd rule that trustees may not advance more than two-thirds of the value of lands or more than half the value of buildings. We have been told, in recent cases, that this rule is an old one, but, if so, it has been more honoured in the breach than in the observance. The great depreciation which has taken place in the value of house property has caused considerable losses upon mortgage investments, and unfortunate trustees, who have acted as they believed prudently, and as they would have done for themselves, have been made, somewhat harshly, to recoup the loss sustained to the trust estate. Until the recent cases were decided, in which the rule was emphatically laid down, it was, I believe, almost the universal practice to advance up to two-thirds of the value of house property. Had it been otherwise very little trust money would have been advanced on mortgage. The last case, Re Olive, Olive v. Westerman, upon this subject, seems to have been a particularly hard one on the unfortunate trustees. There the trustees did not obtain a formal valuation of the property, that is to say, a certificate that it was worth so much and then divide it into one-half or two-thirds, and lend that amount; but they consulted a surveyor and valuer of standing in the district in which the property was situate, who advised that it would be safe to lend £8,000 upon it. The mortgagor, however, wanted £8,300. The surveyor was again consulted, and he then wrote that he had no hesitation in assuring the trustees that they would be safe in lending this amount. The money was accordingly lent. The property went down in value, and a loss resulted in realizing the security. In giving judgment against the trustees, Kay, J., said there was no suggestion that there was any corrupt dealing or anything of that kind, and he had no reason to doubt that the trustees did what they thought was the best thing to be done with reference to the property of the testator, but added "surely trustees should tell their valuers that they are lending trust-money, and that they do not desire to lend more than one-half the actual value of the property. They should ask for a valuation which would enable them to judge whether they are

[ocr errors]

justified in lending the amount they propose to lend"; and then said that although the trustees did take the opinions of the valuer they ought not to have been satisfied with them, but ought to have looked into the matter with more care. In Godfrey v. Faulkner (23 Ch. D. 483) Bacon, V.C., said: "The test of liability always is whether or not the trustees have acted as prudent men would have acted in dealing with their own property. It cannot, I think, be doubted that the trustees in Re Olive believed they were acting as prudent men in doing what they did, and that had they been lending their own moneys they would not have acted differently or advanced one penny less than they did as trustees. I am afraid there are many trustees who had made advances upon house property in contravention to this rule, and in most cases have acted upon the adviceof their solicitors. What I desire to point out is that the rule or dictum having been so enunciated, and so strictly enforced, it behoves every solicitor to act and to advise trustees to act strictly in accordance with it.

I should be taking up too much of your valuable time if I entered into a full explanation of the important case of Re Pope (34 W. R. 693). But it is one that illustrates the pitfalls which surround us in the practice of our profession. It is hardly credible that it should be so; but according to this decision, which is one of the Court of Appeal, a purchaser may complete his purchase only to find that there is a judgment creditor, who, under an order appointing a receiver, the existence of which there is no means of finding out, is entitled to step in and have his judgment debt satisfied to the prejudice of the purchaser. There could not be a stronger case to illustrate the absolute necessity of immediate legislation to remedy such a defect as is there shewn to exist in the law relative to the registration of judgments, executions, &c. As stated in the report, the Incorporated Law Society of the United Kingdom have taken up the matter with a view to a remedy being provided.

With regard to the practice in the county courts the new orders and rules which came into operation in April last did not, I regret to say, make any provision for the much needed reduction in the court fees. These fees are exorbitant, and from my experience I know they are often absolutely prohibitory to parties taking proceedings in these courts. There is one new rule, ord. 5, r. 9, relating to obtaining leave to sue out of the jurisdiction, which causes much unnecessary trouble and annoyance to suitors, as well as taking up much valuable time of the officials. I trust that in the interests of suitors the committee may be successful in getting this rule abrogated.

I take this opportunity of mentioning that, as your president, I was honoured for the first time with an invitation to dine with the treasurer and benchers of the Middle Temple. In proposing the toast of the visitors, the treasurer referred in flattering terms to the good work which this society was doing in the North of England. When I tell you that the treasurer was the Vice-Chancellor of the Duchy, you will appreciate all the more the good feeling shewn to the society,

It was moved by the PRESIDENT, and seconded by the VICE-PRESIDENT (Mr. J. H. KENION), and resolved:-"That the report of the committee, together with the treasurer's accounts, be approved and adopted; and that the same be printed and circulated."

It was moved by Mr. GILL, seconded by Mr. THORNELY, and resolved:"That the thanks of the meeting be given to the president for his address, and that the same be printed as part of the report.'

There were eleven nominations to fill the vacancies upon the committee, with the result that the following seven gentlemen were elected for the term of three years next ensuing :-Messrs. H. H. Gibbons, J. H. Kenion, F. D. Lowndes, C. H. Morton, W. T. Rogers, A. T. Squarey, and C. E. Stevens.

It was moved by Mr. BIRD, seconded by Mr. STONE, and resolved: "That the thanks of the society be given to the president, officers, and members of the committee for their services during the past year."

The following are extracts from the report of the committee:Members.-The number of members at the present time is 286. Corporation Leases.-As soon as the committee became aware that the Corporation of Liverpool were about to make important alterations in their forms of lease, a request was made to the town clerk that the committee of this society might be afforded an opportunity of considering the nature and objects of such alterations. Through the courtesy of the Estates and Finance Committee of the Council, the town clerk, and the deputy town clerk, the drafts of the proposed new forms of leases were submitted to this committee for their consideration. As at first drawn, the alterations were so drastic, and in several respects so objectionable, that this committee reported in the strongest terms against many of the clauses, and asked that the Estate and Finance Committee should receive a deputation to discuss the matter. This was arranged, and a large deputation from this committee urged their views upon the Estate and Finance Committee, with the result that after three separate reports and considerable correspondence and several subsequent interviews with the deputy town clerk the most objectionable clauses were withdrawn. The main object of the corporation in preparing a new form of lease was to put an end to all claims by lessees to easements as against the corporation and other lessees of the corporation, but the principle was carried so far as to place lessees from the corporation in a worse position than freeholders, both as regards rights acquired under the Prescription Act prior to a surrender of an existing lease, and also as to rights which might be acquired under the Prescription Act after the granting of a lease. The committee admitted that it was not unreasonable that the corporation should protect themselves against the acquisition of easements by a lessee by virtue of the maxim "that a man cannot derogate from his own grant,' but they insisted that a leaseholder should not be placed in a worse

[ocr errors]

position with respect to the acquirement of easements than a freeholder, and pointed out that such stringent conditions as it was sought to impose would have the inevitable effect of decreasing the value of corporation leaseholds. In the result the new form of corporation lease contains the following proviso: "Provided always that nothing herein-contained shall operate to grant, by way of implication or otherwise, any right or easement not herein before expressly granted or not hereafter by resolution of the council expressly given over or in respect of any land retained by or belonging to the corporation whether now held on lease from the corporation or not or over any land hereafter to be acquired by the corporation." It is, therefore, most important to note that any easement of whatever nature a lessee from the corporation may require, must be the subject of express grant, even though such easement be appurtenant to the property under a lease which is being surrendered for the purpose of renewal. The corporation have also inserted a covenant to insure against loss by fire whether a ground-rent is reserved or not. As at first proposed, it was intended to require the name of the corporation to be inserted in the policy, but on the representations of this committee that this would have seriously injured the position of mortgagees, the proposal was withdrawn, and the usual form of covenant to insure with provisions as to production of the receipt for premiums, power for the corporation to insure in default of the lessee doing so, and as to rebuilding with insurance moneys, if required by the corporation, was adopted. The committee desire it to be understood that, while they have succeeded in securing many important modifications in the drafts as originally drawn, they are not in any way responsible for them as adopted. They do not, however, consider them in their present form to be unreasonable. Judgments. The attention of members is called to the case of Re Pope (34 W. R. 654, 693) which decides that the registration of an order appointing a receiver confers a good title upon the judgment creditor as against a subsequent bona fide purchaser without notice, notwithstanding that there are no means of ascertaining the existence of such an order. The attention of the Council of the Incorporated Law Society has been called to this decision, with a view to protective legislation. The subject was fully discussed in a paper read by Mr. Godden, of London, at the recent meeting of the Incorporated Law Society in York. Attention is also directed to the case of Newbould v. Smith (29 Ch. D. 882, 33 Ch. D. 128), which is of practical importance to mortgagees.

bar:

LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL.

CALLS TO THE BAR.

The under-mentioned gentleman were on Wednesday called to the LINCOLN'S INN.-Theodore Riversdale Walrond, B.A., Oxford; George Edwin Tyrrell, University of London; Henry William Kent Roscoe, B.A., Oxford; John Singleton Clemons, Corpus Christi College, Oxford; Henry Chartres Biron (Lincoln's Inn Scholarship in Common Law, 1886), B A., Cambridge; Charles Frederic Deakin, B.A., Oxford; Mordaunt Pemberton; and Edward Thomas Foakes.

INNER TEMPLE.-Hugh Fraser, late Scholar and Law Student of Trinity Hall, Cambridge, M.A., LL.M., proxime accessit Chancellor's Medal for Legal Studies, Cambridge University, 1885, holder of a studentship awarded Hil., 1884, and a Scholarship in Common Law awarded July, 1886; Arthur Grey, Walter Jack Howell, John Highfield Leigh, Oxford; Herbert Heape, B.A., Cambridge: John Iltyd Dillwyn Nicholl, BA, Oxford; Alfred Clarke-Williams, M.A., LL.M., Cambridge; George Ranken Askwith, B.A., Oxford; Leonard Owen Howard Tripp, B.A., Cambridge; James Rolt, B.A., Oxford; Harry Armytage, B.A., Cambridge; Stephen Fairbairn, B.A., Cambridge; Roanden Albert Henry Bickford-Smith, M.A., Cambridge; Sidney Arthur Taylor Rowlatt, B.A., Cambridge; Ernest William Pearson, B.A., Oxford; Lauriston Leonard Batten, B.A., LL.B., Cambridge. Fordyce James Sheridan, Constantine Albert Ionides, B.A., Oxford; Felix Arthur Davis, B A., LL.B., Cambridge, Sethur Biligirirangam Ramasami Aiengar, John Paget Mellor, B.A., LL.B., Cambridge; Markham Richard Leeson-Marshall, B.A., Oxford; Henry Hyman Haldinstein, B.A., Oxford; Thomas Bailey Saunders, B.A., Oxford; George Augustine Blackwell, London; Charles Frederic Duncan, B.A., Cambridge; Frank Ernest Ward, B.A., Oxford; Frank Mellor, B.A, LL.B., Cambridge; Arthur Barnsley Shaw, B.A., Oxford; Arthur Shepherd Hargreaves, B.A, LL.B., Cambridge; Alexander Hall Carrington, B.A., LL.B., Cambridge; Christopher Mounsey Wilson, B.A., Cambridge; Barnard Thornton Hodgson, B.A., LL.B., Cambridge; Henry Milner White, M.A., LL.M., Cambridge; Herbert Stephenson Smith, Edward Joseph Vaugham, Arthur Russell, B. A, Oxford; and Henry Bournes Higgins.

MIDDLE TEMPLE.-Thomas Boston Bruce; William R. Le Fanu, B.A., St. John's College, Cambridge, of the Irish Bar, 100 guineas Middle Temple Equity Scholar, 50 guineas Real and Personal Property Scholar; Suresh Chundra Biswas, Balliol College, Oxford; Leon Eugene Leclezio; Aziz Ahmad, B.A., Cambridge University; Francis Fitzgerald, B.A., LL.B., Trinity College, Dublin; Luke Livingstone Macassey; Lupton Topham Topham; Arthur Stanley Wills, B.A., Trinity College, Cambridge; John J. Brigg, B.A., LL.B., Cambridge University; William Edwin Barling; Frederick Charles Wells Durrant, M.A., Edinburgh University; Daniel Warde; and Ebenezer Le Riche.

GRAY'S INN.-Peirce de Lacy Henry Johnstone, M.A., Balliol College, Oxford; John William M'Carthy (Lecture Prizeman Equity, December, 1885); Frederick Arthur Greer, M.A., late Fullarton Philosophical Scholar, Aberdeen University, and Bacon Scholar, Gray's Inn, 1884; Arthur Beaumont Wells, of Grenada, in the West Indies, and Horace Bertram Nelson, M.A., B.C. L., Worcester College, Oxford.

COUNTY COURT COMMITTALS. AT a recent sitting of the Brompton County Court, Judge Stonor made the following observations:-Before I hear the judgment summonses to-day, I think it right to make some observations with reference to the recent case of Reeve v. Fowle, on prohibition in the Queen's Bench Division, and to the practice hitherto prevailing in this court of suspending the issue of warrants under orders of committal whilst certain instalments are paid, in those cases where the defendants have been able to make the payments originally ordered by the court and neglected to do so, and are, therefore, liable to committal, but nevertheless are, at the dates of the orders of committal, only able to pay such instalments. This practice has always been carried out by me by means of a simple direction to the registrar not to issue the warrant to the high bailiff so long as the instalments are duly paid. Such direction is wholly distinct from the order of committal, and is similar to the direction which I understand is given by the High Court in like cases when it directs that the order of committalshould lie in the office" for a certain period; but at the same time I must add that I understand some registrars have entered such suspension of the warrants on the minute book of the court, to which I see no objection. The order of committal itself, when issued, is, however, absolute, and only voidable on payment of the whole sum for the non-payment of which it was originally made. It is addressed to the high bailiff in the prescribed form, signed by the registrar, and under the seal of the court. The practice has been followed in the various courts over which I have had the honour to preside for 22 years during the whole of that period, and I believe that it has been followed in the great majority of the county courts of England during a much longer period. It has also, to my knowledge, been the subject of frequent and anxious consultations amongst the judges of county courts, and always with the result of its approval by the great majority. In 1880 we had the satisfaction of learning the opinion of Lord Selborne, then Lord Chancellor, on the subject, and of finding it to be in conformity with the views of the majority of the judges. In a letter addressed to one of our body, dated November 3, 1880, and which for convenience was printed at the time, his lordship thus expressed himself with reference to an order of committal then under his consideration:-"If you had satisfied yourself that the defendant could have paid the debt of £29 since the date of the judgment, then you could have committed him, or you might have, on being satisfied that he had not then the means of paying it, made a fresh order. If you had committed him on being so satisfied, you might have ordered that the order of commitment should not be issued so long as he complied with the terms you might impose of the debt by monthly instalments of £1. The practice which has thus which, in fact, had been the payment been so long and so widely adopted and so highly sanctioned has, I need not say, proved most beneicial to the suitors and the public in diminishing the number of committals, and in insuring the payment of debts, and, indeed, is generally pursued with the consent of both plaintiffs and defendants. For the present, however, the decision of the Divisional Court, being subsequent to the contrary decision of Pollock, B., in be considered binding, and the practice in question must now be disconthe same case (ante, p. 29), although not on appeal from it, must, I think tinued. An appeal, however, will be entered against the decision of the Divisional Court, and if it be reversed that practice will, of course, be restored. In the meantime no directions will be given for the suspension of committal as to which directions for the suspension of warrants have of warrants, and no warrants will be issued under the numerous orders hitherto been made.

LEGAL NEWS.

APPOINTMENTS.

Mr. ARTHUR KEKEWICH, Q.C., who has been appointed a Judge of the Chancery Division on the resignation of Vice-Chancellor Sir James Bacon, is the second son of Mr. Samuel Trehawke Kekewich, of Peamore, Devonshire, and was born in 1832. He was educated at Eton, and he was formerly a scholar of Balliol College, Oxford, where he graduated first class in Classics and second class in Mathematics in 1854, and he was subsequently elected a Fellow of Exeter College. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Trinity Term, 1858. He became a Queen's Counsel in 1877, and he formerly practised before Mr. Justice Fry, and, more recently, in the court of Mr. Justice Kay. Mr. Justice Kekewich is a bencher of Lincoln's-inn and a member of the Incorporated Council of Law Reporting.

Mr. HENRY FRANCIS HERBERT THOMPSON, barrister, has been appointed Honorary Secretary to the Preliminary Committee of the Imperial Institute. Mr. Thompson is the only son of Sir Henry Thompson, and was born in 1859. He was educated at Marlborough College and at Trinity College, Cambridge. He was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in January, 1882, and he is a member of the Northern Circuit.

Mr. JOHN HAMER KENION, Solicitor (of the firm of Tyrer, Kenion, & Simpson), of Liverpool, has been elected President of the Liverpool Incorporated Law Society for the ensuing year. Mr. Kenion was admitted a solicitor in 1864.

Mr. ARTHUR JOHN BEAUCHAMP, solicitor (of the firm of Allen & Beauchamp), of Worcester, has been appointed Under-Sheriff of that city for the ensuing year. Mr. Beauchamp was admitted a solicitor in 1874.

Mr. WILLIAM HIRST SIMPSON, solicitor, has been elected Town Clerk of the newly-incorporated borough of Higham Ferrers. Mr. Simpson is clerk to the county magistrates at Higham Ferrers. He was admitted a solicitor in 1872.

Mr. JOHN EDWARD Fox, solicitor (of the firm of Fox & Page), of 2, Serle-street, has been appointed Registrar of the Croydon County Court (Circuit No. 45) in succession to the late Mr. William Henry Rowland. Mr. Fox was admitted a solicitor in 1880.

Mr. ALFRED JOHN WINTER, Solicitor, of Swaffham, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature. Mr. THOMAS FOSTER BARHAM, Solicitor, of Bridgewater, has been appointed Assistant Clerk to the Bridgewater Board of Guardians. Mr. Barham was admitted a solicitor in 1875. He is in partnership with his father, Mr. Eustace Barham.

Mr. THOMAS WALTERS, solicitor, of Carmarthen, has been appointed Under-Sheriff of the Town and County of the Town of Carmarthen for the ensuing year. Mr. Walters was admitted a solicitor in 1875.

Mr. HERBERT PARSONS, solicitor, of Mildenhall, has been appointed Clerk to the Mildenhall Board of Guardians, Assessment Committee, School Attendance Committee, and Rural Sanitary Authority, and Superintendent Registrar for the Mildenhall District.

Mr. PATRICK CUMIN, barrister, secretary to the Education Department, has been created a Civil Companion of the Order of the Bath. Mr. Cumin is the eldest son of Dr. William Cumin, of Clifton, Bristol, and was born in 1824. He was educated at Balliol College, Oxford, where he graduated third class in Classics in 1845. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Trinity Term, 1855, and he formerly practised in the Court of Chancery. Mr. Cumin was secretary to the Scotch Education Commission, and he was private secretary to the late Mr. Forster when Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education. He was assistant secretary to the Education Department from 1871 till 1882, and counsel to the department from 1882 till 1884, when he was appointed secretary to the department. Mr. FREDERICK ODDIN TAYLOR, solicitor, of Norwich, has been elected Sheriff of that city for the ensuing year. Mr. Taylor is superintendent registrar for the Norwich district. He was admitted a solicitor in 1872, and he is in partnership with his father, Mr. John Oddin Howard Taylor. Mr. SYDNEY COZENS-HARDY, Solicitor, of Norwich, has been appointed Under-Sheriff of that city for the ensuing year. Mr. Cozens-Hardy is an LL.B. of the University of London. He was admitted a solicitor in 1873. Mr. JOHN CROW PORTER, Solicitor, of Billiter House, Billiter-street, and of Richmond, has been appointed Honorary Solicitor to the Wine and Spirit Trades Benevolent Society. Mr. Porter was admitted a solicitor in 1878.

Mr. RICHARD ROBINSON RODD, solicitor, of Stonehouse, has been appointed Clerk to the East Stonehouse Local Board. Mr. Rodd was admitted a solicitor in 1884.

Mr. EDWIN DOCKER, solicitor (of the firm of Docker & Jagger), of Birmingham and Smethwick, has been appointed Clerk to the King's Norton Board of Guardians, Assessment Committee, School Attendance Committee, and Rural Sanitary Authority, on the resignation of his father, Mr. Ralph Docker, who is coroner for East Worcestershire. Mr. E. Docker was admitted a solicitor in 1879. He is superintendent registrar for the King's Norton District, and clerk to the Smethwick Local Board.

Mr. J. ARTHUR EISDELL, solicitor (of the firm of Eisdell & Thompson), of No. 16, Jermyn-street, London, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.

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

WINDING UP NOTICES.

JOINT STOCK COMPANIES.
LIMITED IN CHANCERY.

London Gazette. - FRIDAY, Nov. 12.

Mr. Justice CHITTY. Mr. Pemberton Ward

Pemberton

Ward
Pemberton
Ward

Mr. Justice
KEKEWICH.

Mr. Carrington
Jackson

Carrington
Jackson
Carrington
Jackson

CHESMAN & CO, LIMITED.-By an order made by North, J., dated Nov 6, it was
ordered that the company be wound up. Rossiter, Verulam bdgs, Gray's
inn, agent for Joel & Parsons, Newcastle upon Tyne, solors for petner
FLOYD CAB CO, LIMITED.-Bacon, V.C., has, by an order dated Nov 6, appointed
HYGIENIC HEATING AND LIGHTING CO, LIMITED.-Chitty, J.. has, by an order
Arthur Richard Farlow, 3, Newgate st, to be official liquidator
dated Mar 15, appointed Walter Percy Eldrid, 19, Old Jewry chmbrs, to
be official liquidator

NORTH BRAZILIAN SUGAR FACTORIES, LIMITED.-Petn for winding up, pre-
sented Oct 25, directed to be heard before Chitty, J., on Nov 20. Norman,
Gt Marlborough st, petner
NOTTINGHAM MALLEABLE IRON CO, LIMITED.-Petn for winding up, presente l
Nov 10, directed to be heard before Kay, J, on Saturday, Nov 20. Stileman &
Co, Southampton st, Bloomsbury sq, agents for Toynbee & Co, Lincoln, solors
for petner

UNLIMITED IN CHANCERY.

MYRTLE SPRING ESTATE.-By an order made by North, J, dated Nov 6, it was ordered that the estate be wound up. Cunliffes & Davenport, Chancery lane, agents for Alderson & Co, Eckington, solors for petner

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES DISSOLVED.

No. 2, £10 BURIAL SOCIETY, Monument Inn, Canterbury, Kent. Nov 9

LIMITED IN CHANCERY.
London Gazette-TUESDAY, Nov. 16,

WILLIAM HEATH, ROBERT WILLIAM PARKER, and JOHN GEORGE BRETT, PIONEERS' FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Ingress Tavern, Northfleet, Kent. Nov 4 solicitors, 3, New London-street, Mark-lane, London. The said William Heath retiring from business, Messrs. Parker & Brett will continue the business. June 30. [Gazette, Nov. 12.]

JOHN ALFRED ALSOP and JOHN PIDSLEY MANN, solicitors (Alsop, Mann, & Co.), 23, Great Marlborough-street, Regent-street, W., and Willesden, N.W. Nov. 13.

WILLIAM SLATER, THOMAS STROVER TURNBULL, and WILLIAM WILKINSON
SLATER, Solicitors (Slater. Turnbull, & Slater), Manchester. The said William
Slater and William Wilkinson Slater will continue the business at 87,
Mosley-street, Manchester, under the style or firm of W. Slater & Sons.
The said Thomas Strover Turnbull will practise at Garrick-buildings, 51,
Fountain-street, in the said city, under the style or firm of Sutton,
Elliott, & Turnbull. Nov 13.
[Gazette, Nov. 16 ]

GENERAL.

Mr. W. Bowen Rowlands, Q.C., M.P., has been elected by the Honourable Society of Gray's-inn a member of the committee of the Bar Library at the Royal Courts, in place of the late Mr. Hugh Cowie, Q C.

[ocr errors]

A San Francisco paper defines the word jury as noun substantive. A number of persons appointed by a court to assist the attorneys in preventlaw from degenerating into justice."

On Wednesday, at the Southwark Police-court, Harvey Drew, solicitor, was finally examined before Mr. Slade on a charge of embezzling and stealing on various dates between February last year and January in this year divers sums of money, amounting in the aggregate to £4,083, received by him for and on account of the London Leather Warehouse Co, of which he was secretary. Mr. St. John Wontner appeared to prosecute; and Mr. Lick fold for the defence. The prisoner had disappeared in January last and had been traced to Sydney, New South Wales, where Inspector Lansdowne, of Scotland-yard, who had been sent out under the Fugitive Offenders Act, found him living under the name of Sir Arthur Adair. He appeared to have squandered a considerable fortune in a very short period. The evidence in the present case was that the prisoner had received certain sums on account of the company, of which Mr. Alfred Lafone, M.P., is the manager, and paid them into his own banking account at the London and Westminster Bank, drawing out the

CARDIGAN SLATE QUARRIES, LIMITED.-Kay, J., has fixed Wednesday, Nov 24,
at 12, at his chambers, for the appointment of an official liquidator
GITTENS, LICKFOLD, & CO, LIMITED.-By an order made by North, J., dated Nov
6, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Beall & Co, Bucklersbury,
solors for the petner
HASTINGS AND ST. LEONARDS PASSENGER STEAMSHIP CO, LIMITED.-Petn for
winding up. presented Nov 15, directed to be heard before Chitty, J., on
Saturday, Nov 27. Montagu, Bucklersbury, solor for the petner

H. F. VAN & CO, LIMITED.-Petn for winding up, presented Nov 13, directed to
be heard before North, J., on Nov 27. Anderson & Sons, Ironmonger lane,
solors for the petners

LIVERPOOL AND ISLE OF MAN STEAMSHIP Co, LIMITED.-By an order made by
Bacon, V.C., dated Nov 6, it was ordered that the company be wound up.
Pritchard & Co, Painters' Hall, Little Trinity lane, solors for petner
NATIONAL TRUST CO, LIMITED. By an order made by North, J., dated Nov 6, it
was ordered that the company be wound up. Beall & Co, Bucklersbury, solors
for petners

PRIMROSE PRESS AGENCY CO, LIMITED.-Kay, J., has fixed Nov 22, at 11, at his
chambers, for appointment of an official liquidator

SHORT HORN DAIRY CO, LIMITED.-Petn for winding up, presented Nov 12, directed to be heard before Stirling, J., on Nov 27. Jennings, Holborn, solor for petner

WEST OF ENGLAND SHIPPING CO, LIMITED.-Creditors are required, on or before Dec 31, to send their names and addresses and particulars of their debts or claims, to Harry Coleman Richardson, 99, Gresham st. Tuesday, Jan 18, at 12, is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims

[blocks in formation]

FLINT, JANE, Buxton, Derby. Dec 25. Needham & Co, Manchester
GRAY, SARAH, Gateshead, Durham. Dec 1. Laws & Co, Newcastle upon Tyne
HAWORTH, JOHN, Southport, Lancaster, Gent. Dec 25. Needham & Co, Man-
chester

JAYE. WILLIAM, Mildmay grove, Islington, Gent. Nov 30. Bridger, St
Helen's pl, Bishopsgate st Within

JEWEL, HENRY, Salcombe Regis, Devon, Doctor of Medicine. Jan 1. Brutton,
Ottery St Mary

JONES, FANNY MARY FOXCROFT, Folkestone. Dec 1.
Gracechurch st

Pritchard & SOLS, KING, RICHARD HENRY, Little Glemham, Suffolk. Dec 1. Henry King, Gresham st

LALLAM, MICHAEL, Downham Market, Norfolk, Gent. Nov 30. Nunn, Downham Market

LAMPRELL, KATHERINE FRANCES, Cecil st, Strand. Nov 25. Jenkins, Tavistock st, Covent garden

MATTINSON, JOSEPH, Wood st, Warehouseman. Dec 6. Phelps & Co, Gresham st NEWTON, SAMUEL THOMAS, Manchester, Gent. Nov 30. Lee, Manchester OLLIVANT, ELIZABETH, Symonstone Hall, nr Burnley. Dec 25. Needham & Co, PEARSON, THOMAS, Foubert's pl, Regent st, Glass Dealer. Dec 14. Pearson, Foubert's pl, Regent st

Manchester

PRATT, REV THOMAS, Barnsley, York. Jan 1. Jones, Cavan

PRIESTLEY, JAMES, Guiseley, York, Grocer. Nov 31. Bond & Co, Leeds

PROCTOR, CHARLES, Grafton st, Mile End rd, Dealer in Building Materials
Dec 31. Woodroffe, Gt Dover st, Southwark
RANDALL, SAMUEL, Bredfield, Suffolk, Farmer. Dec 31. Moor, Woodbridge
STOKES, MARY, Wolverhampton. Dec 10. Neve & Cresswell, Wolverhampton
TIDD-PRATT, Rev CHARLES PALLMER, Bracknell, Berks, Clerk. Nov 13.
Tidd-Pratt, Kington

UPTON, CHARLES WILLIAM, St Mark's eq, Regent's pk. Dec 1. Hunters &
Haynes, New sq, Lincoln's inn

WARD, SARAH, Aylesbury, Bucks. Dec 11. Horwood & James, Aylesbury WELLS, JOHN, Brixton rd, Leather Merchant. Dec 31. Woodroffe, Gt Dover st, Southwark

WILKINSON, THOMAS, St Anne's on the Sea, Lytham, Lancaster, Accountant. Dec 29. Wilding & Son, Blackburn

WILLIS, ROBERT, Sunderland, Joiner. Nov 30. Stockdale, Sunderland WRIGHT, BENTLEY WARREN, Karesbrough, Chemist. Dec 1. Gilling, Kaaresbrough

FEE, TWO GUINEAS, for a sanitary inspection and report on a London dwellinghouse. Country surveys by arrangement. The Sanitary Engineering and Ventilation Company, 115, Victoria-street, Westminster. Prospectus free.-[ADVT. FURNISH ON NORMAN & STACEY'S SYSTEM; No Deposit; 1. 2, or 3 years credit; 60 wholesale firms. Offices, 79, Queen Victoria-st., E.C. Branches at 121, Pall Mall, S. W., & 9. Liverpool-st., E.C. Goods delivered free.-ADVT.

BANKRUPTCY NOTICES.

London Gazette.-FRIDAY, Nov. 12, 1886. RECEIVING ORDERS.

ANDREASON, CHRISTIAN, Newcastle on Tyne, General Merchant. Newcastle on
Tyne. Pet Nov 10. Ord Nov 10
BAGOT, ARTHUR GREVILLE, Army and Navy Club, Pall Mall, Gent. High Court.
Pet Aug 7. Ord Nov 8
BAYNE, WILLIAM BICKNELL, Cork st, Burlington gdns, Tailor. High Court. Pet
Nov 8. Pet Nov 9

BENNETT, JESSE, Bristol, Builder. Bristol. Pet Nov 9. Ord Nov 9

BIRD, JOSEPH, Cheltenham, Tailor. Cheltenham. Pet Nov 6. Ord Nov 6 BLYTHE, CHARLES WEBSTER, Great Grimsby, Fish Curer. Great Grimsby. Pet BURDEN, HAROLD NELSON, Hythe, Kent, Grazier. Canterbury. Pet Nov 8. Ord Nov 10

Nov 9. Ord Nov 9

CHAMBERS, WILLIAM, Kimberley, Nottinghamshire, Egg Dealer. Nottingham. Pet Nov 9. Ord Nov 9

CUE, WILLIAM TAYLOR, address unknown, Draper. High Court. Pet Sept 18. Ord Nov 9

DAVIDSON, JOHN, Tynemouth, Northumberland, Plumber. Newcastle on Tyne.

Pet Nov 10. Pet Nov 10

DE FRAINE, JAMES, Aylesbury, Nurseryman. Aylesbury. Pet Nov 8. Ord
Nov 10

DUNSTAN, GEORGE, Nottingham, out of business. Nottingham. Pet Nov 10.
Ord Nov 10
ELLIS, JOHN, Sheffield, Collector. Sheffield. Pet Nov 4. Ord Nov 6

FRICKER, FRANK EDWARD, Swansea, Clothier. Swansea. Pet Nov 9. Ord

Nov 9

GARROD, HENRY GOLDING, Gt Yarmouth, Gasfitter. Gt Yarmouth. Pet Nov 9. Ord Nov 9

GOREHAM, WILLIAM, Norwich, General shop Keeper. Norwich. Pet Nov 8. Ord
Nov 10

HALL, JOHN, Cranfield, Bedford, Farmer. Bedford. Pet Nov 9. Ord Nov 9
HOBINSTOCK, HUGO, and JULIUS HOBINSTOCK, Long lane, Furriers. High Court.
Pet Nov 8. Ord Nov 8
HOBSON, JAMES, jun, Baildon, Yorks, Carter. Bradford. Pet Nov 8. Ord Nov 8
HOUGHTON, RAPHAEL, Newport, Mon, Draper. Newport, Mon. Pet Nov 9. Ord
Nov 9

HUNTER, ROBERT MARTIN, Clifton, Bristol, Plumber. Bristol. Pet Nov 8. Ord
Nov 8
JONES, CHARLES, Cardiff, Hair Dresser. Cardiff. Pet Nov 10. Ord Nov 10
KNIGHT, JOHN HARRIS, Whitstable, Kent, Builder. Canterbury. Pet Nov 10.
Ord Nov 10
KNOTT, WILLIE JAMES, Colchester, Grocer. Colchester. Pet Nov 8. Ord Nov 8
LEWIS, STEPHEN RICHARD, Begelly, Pembrokeshire, Builder. Pembroke Dock.
Pet Nov 8. Pet Nov 9

LLOYD, GEORGE, Dawley, Salop, Licensed Victualler. Madeley. Pet Oct 29.
Ord Nov 10

LUNNON, DAVID, Abbotts Langley, Hertfordshire, Clerk. St Albans. Pet Oct 23. Ord Nov 5

MOULD, JOHN CLARKE, Newport, Isle of Wight, Solicitor. Newport and Ryde.
Pet Nov 8. Ord Nov 8
NEILL, EDMUND, Stanley bldngs, St Pancras rd, Gatekeeper. High Court. Pet
Nov 8. Ord Nov 8

NEWLAND, MATTHEW, Dagenham, Essex, Auctioneer. Chelmsford. Pet Nov 9.
Ord Nov 9

NEWROTH, CATHERINE, Markham sq, Chelsea, Milliner. High Court. Pet Nov 9. Ord Nov 9

OGDEN, HETH, Castleford, Yorks, Brassfounder. Wakefield. Pet Nov 4. Ord
Nov 4
ROBERTS, JOHN, Hope, Flintshire, Labourer. Wrexham. Pet Nov 9. Ord Nov
ROCKE. HENRY SERLE, Green lanes, Stoke Newington, Agent to Corn Merchant,
High Court. Pet Nov 10. Ord Nov 10

ROWE, WILLIAM, Cardiff, Glass Dealer. Cardiff. Pet Nov 8. Ord Nov 8
SAMPSON, HENRY, Southport, Lancashire, Photographer. Liverpool. Pet Nov 9.
Ord Nov 9

SIMS, ARTHUR HENRY, Southampton, Grocer. Southampton. Pet Nov 10. Ord
Nov 10
SPARKES, FRANK PEACHEY, Funtington, Sussex, Farmer. Brighton. Pet Nov 6.
Ord Nov 9

STEVENS, ROBERT JOHN, Swansea, Plumber. Swansea. Pet Nov 5. Ord Nov 6
STOPFORD, JAMES, Manchester, Cigar Merchant. Manchester. Pet Nov 8. Ord
Nov 8

STRANGE, JOHN, Southampton, Grocer. Southampton. Pet Oct 28. Ord Nov 8
TEMPERTON, JOSEPH, Kingston upon Hull, Seed Crusher, Kingston upon Hull.
Pet Oct 25. Ord Nov 9

THOMAS, ROBERT, Llanfairfechan, Carnarvon, Butcher. Bangor. Pet Nov 8.
Ord Nov 10
TUMMON, HENRY THOMAS. Crawshay rd, Akerman rd, Brixton, out of business.
High Court. Pet Nov 8. Ord Nov 8

VIRGO, HORACE, Bristol, Baker. Bristol. Pet Nov 8. Ord Nov 9

WALE, JAMES FREDERICK, Birmingham, Grocer. Birmingham. Pet Nov 9. Ord
Nov 9
WEBSTER, SIMEON, Leeds, Commission Agent. Leeds. Pet Nov 8. Ord Nov 8
WHITE, THOMAS, ahd LUKE WHITE, Rawmarsh, Yorks, Painters. Sheffield. Pet
Nov 6. Ord Nov 6

WILSON, JOHN, Calverley, Yorks, Physician. Bradford. Pet Nov 9. Ord Nov 9
WOODS, WILLIAM, Gt Bealings, Suffo`k, Dealer. Ipswich. Pet Nov 9. Ord
Nov 9
RECEIVING ORDERS RESCINDED.
CHEESMAN. GEORGE EDWARD VINCENT SIDNEY, Gt St Helens, Solicitor. High
Court. Ord July 19 Resc Nov 8

SWALLOW, PHILLIS, Marlborough House, Pall Mall, Nurse. High Court. Ord
June 10. Resc Oct 28
FIRST MEETINGS.

ANDREASON, CHRISTIAN, Newcastle on Tyne, General Merchant. Nov 24 at 11.30.
Off Rec, Pink lane, Newcastle on Tyne

BIRD, JOSEPH, Cheltenham, Tailor. Nov 20 at 3.30. County Court, Cheltenham BOTTING, FREDERICK (Sep Estate), Shalford, Surrey, Farmer. Nov 20 at 10 45. Borough and County Hall, Guildford, Surrey

BOTTING, THOMAS (Sep Estate), Chilworth, Farmer. Nov 20 at 10.45. Borough
BOTTING, THOMAS, and FREDERICK BOTTING, Chilworth, Farmers. Nov 2) at 10.45.
and County Hall, Guildford, Surrey
Borough and County Hall, Guildford
BROMFIELD, CHARLES, Exeter, Manufacturing Stationer. Nov 22 at 11. Castle
of Exeter, Exeter

BUNNELL, JONATHAN, Middleton, Lancashire, Veterinary Stationer. Nov 22
at 11.30. Off Rec, Ogden's chmbrs, Bridge st, Manchester
COLLETTE, CHARLES, Torquay, Theatrical Lessee. Nov 25 at 2. Royal Hotel,
Torquay

CONNELL, FREDERIC HENRY, High rd, Kilburn, Watchmaker. Nov 19 at 11. 33,
Carey st, Lincoln's inn

COURT, FRANCIS, Wingham, Kent, Farmer. Nov 19 at 10.30. 32, St George's st, Canterbury

DAVIDSON, JOHN, Tynemouth, Northumberland, Plumber. Nov 24 at 11. Off Rec, Pink lane, Newcastle on Tyne

DEHOCHSTRASSER, HENRY, Upper Station rd, Finchley, Mercantile Clerk. Nov 22 at 11. 28 and 29, St Swithin's lane

DIXON, MARY, Church Coniston, Lancashire, Licensed Victualler. Nov 20 at 12. 37, Stramongate, Kendal

EDGAR, THOMAS JACKSON, Botcherbury, nr Carlisle, out of business. Nov 22 at 12. Off Rec, 34, Fisher st, Carlisle

FRICKER, FRANK EDWARD, Swansea, Clothier. Nov 20 at 11. Off Rec, 6, Rutland st, Swansea

GARDNER, ARTHUR GILL, Leeds, Traveller. Nov 22 at 11. Off Rec, 22, Park row, Leeds

GLOVER, WILLIAM, Nottingham, Baker. Nov 19 at 12. Off Rec, 1, High pavement, Nottingham

HAGG, JOHN, Geneva rd, Brixton, Warehouseman. Nov 19 at 12. Bankruptcy bldgs, Portugal st, Lincoln's inn

HALL, HERBERT HAMPTON, Liverpool, Commission Agent. Nov 19 at 3. Off Rec, 35, Victoria st, Liverpool

HAMMOND, EDWARD, Tenterden, Kent, Miller. Nov 22 at 2.30. Spencer & Reeve, Mount Pleasant, Tunbridge Wells

HANMER, LLEWELLYN, Manchester, Yarn Agent. Nov 25 at 11.30. Off Rec Ogden's chbrs, Bridge st, Manchester

HEARSEY, WILLIAM, Margate, Coal Merchant. Nov 19 at 10. 32, St George's st, Canterbury

Off Rec, 31, Manor' Off Rec, 12, Trede

HOBSON, JAMES. jun, Baildon, Yorks, Carter. Nov 22 at 11.
row, Bradford
HOUGHTON, RAPHAEL, Newport, Mon, Draper. Nov 22 at 12.
HOYLE, JAMES, Accrington, Mill Furnisher. Nov 19 at 3. Commercial Hotel,
gar pl, Newport, Mon
Blackburn rd, Accrington
HUNTER, ROBERT MARTIN, Clifton, Bristol, Plumber. Nov 22 at 12.30. Off Rec,
Bank chbrs, Bristol

JONES, FREDERICK BROOKHOLDING, Bristol, Horse Repository Proprietor. Nov 20 at 12. Off Rec, Bank chbrs, Bristol

LEWIS, WILLIAM AUGUSTUS, Cardiff, Builder. Nov 19 at 12. Off Rec, 3, Crockherbtown, Cardiff

MEDWIN, LESLIE ALLEN, Ladbroke gr, Notting hill, no occupation. Nov 19 at 11. 33, Carey st, Lincoln's inn

NEWNS, JOHN EDWIN, Warrington, Lancashire, Beerhouse Keeper. Nov 26 at 11.30. Court house, Upper Bank st, Warrington

OGDEN, HETH, Castleford, Yorks, Brassfounder. Nov 19 at 2. Off Rec, Southgate chbrs, Southgate, Wakefield

PACY, THOMAS, Bolton upon Dearne, Yorks, Farmer. Nov 22 at 3. Off Rec, Figtree lane, Sheffield

PERKIN, HENRY, and ALBERT HARRY MAY, Newport, Mon., Outfitters. Nov 19 at 12. Off Rec, Tredegar pl, Newport, Mon

PEVERLEY, C. H., Long Newton, Darlington, Farmer. Nov 25 at 3.15. Grosvenor Hotel, Manchester

REED, WILLIAM, Waddon New rd, Croydon, Baker. Nov 22 at 12. Off Rec, 109, Victoria st, Westminster

ROBERTS, JOHN WILLIAM, Bethesda, Carnarvonshire, Stonemason. Dec 2 at 10.30. Queen's Head Cafe, Bangor

ROGERS, CHARLES, Leeds, Cabinet Maker. Nov 22 at 12. Off Rec, 22, Park row, Leeds

SAMPSON, HENRY, Southport, Photographer. Nov 23 at 2. Off Rec, 35, Victoria st, Liverpool

SHIPLEY, JOHN, Dalton in Furaess, Licensed Victualler. Nov 19 at 10. 2, Paxton ter, Barrow in Furness

SIMS, ARTHUR HENRY, Southampton, Grocer and Provision Merchant. Nov 24 at 11. Off Rec, 4, East st, Southampton

« PreviousContinue »