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

g Aug. 13, I887. THE SOLICITORS’ JOURNAL. 693

[graphic]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

This was a summons for leave to bring an action in the nature of a bill of review to vary an order made by the Court of Appeal upon a former summons in the action.

l_{.n',_J., held that the Court still had power to give leave to bring an action in the nature of a bill of review, although it could now be done on summons instead of by petition, and that the grounds of relief were precisely the same as before the Judicature Act; and, further, that the application was rightly made to the High Court and not to the Court of Appeal.—OoL'.\'snL, Solomon; Bonny. Soucrroas, Harper Q Bntlcoclt; longbourne 4- Stevens.

JENKINSON 1'. BRANDLEY MINING 00.; JENKS (CLAIMANT)-
Q. B. Div., 8th August.

[ocr errors]

This was an interpleader summons referred to the court by Pollock, B., at the request. of the parties. The plaintiff, having obtained judgment in an action for goods sold against the defendants, who were a limited company incorporated under the Companies Acts, proceeded to issue execution. T_he sheriff having seized certain goods of the defendants, the same were claimed by the claimant, who was the holder of twenty debentures for £100 each issued by the defendant company, being the whole of their first issue. Each of the debentures bore a reference to a mortgage deed, which contained a declaration of trust in favour of the debentureholders. Neither the debentures nor the mortgage deed were registered under the Bills of Sale Act, 1882. It was argued on behalf of the execution creditor that the debentures were merely bonds for the payment of money, and did not pass any property whatever in the goods unless registered under the Bills of Sale Act: Bracklsburat v. R:n'lil'a_:/ I’n'nlin_a and PIlbli8})wig Co. (W. N., 1884, p. 70). The present case was distinguishable from Ita.is_v. Army and Navy Hotel (Io. (35 \V. R. 40, 34 Ch. D. 43), which only apphed as between grantor and grantee. On the part of the claimant it was contended that section 17 of the Bills of Sale Act expressly excluded debentures from the provisions of the Act, so that there was iio necessity for registering them. Moreover, section 43 of the Companies Act, 1862, provided that every mortgage granted by a company should be registered lll the company's register hook; and practically anybody had a right to 80 and see the register ; so that creditors of the company were suiiiciently Protected. At any rate, the debentures created an equitable charge in lavoiir of the claimant: Ross v. Army and 1i’av_z/ Hotel 00., in which case, as in this, there were debentures and an covering mortgage deed. The debentures entitled the holder to defeat the claim of the execution cregl0<i)r:6.giidicature Act, 1873, s. 24, sub-section 4: Enyolbrw/i v. Nixon, 10

- . 0.

THE Corn-i~ (Giiovii, J., and HUDDLRSTON, B.) dealt with the case under 0111- 57, r. 8, as the summons had been referred to the court at the request °fhe Parties, and barred the claim of the claimant. These debenture bonds did not confer on the holder any such right of property as to make him a successful claimant in an interpleader issue. The claimant said iliat if he could not succeed on the mortgage, because it was not regisleredi _he could succeed on the debentures ; and he relied on section 17 of lhe Bills of Sale Act. But that section did not apply to all debentures 8e"e"]1.Y 1 B1111 it was doubtful whether it applied to the debentures of this c°P1P3|1Y- The case of Ra-is v. Army and Nrw_i/ Hotel Co. was different from ibiscase. There it was decided that the debentures were a valid charge figalllfltihe company. That was not a decision affecting third parties. I“he claimant was not entitled to succeed against the execution creditor.(»§1!NsBL, Wedderburn and .D'El/"CONN ; T. Willes Cliitty. Sonici-roiis, “"‘°li 8°", 5' Jones, for Isaac Low!/iian, Keswick; Pritclmrd, Enylq/iflld, if (70

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

MTIIIS was an em parle appeal by the bankrupt, E. M. Langworthy, from

'- Registrar Hazlitt, refusing to appoint a day for the purpose of hearing F“ '§PPlication by the bankrupt to be allowed to be represented on an "qlllry before the Chief Oflicial Receiver as to damages for breach of promise of marriage. The bankruptcy petition was personally served on the °'mk'“Pt in the Argentine Republic, where he was resident. The receiving '-‘"191 Was not served on him, and the bankrupt did not appear upon any if the P1'°¢fi6dings. The ofiicial receiver was holding an inquiry 8-B I0

f"1'°B¢B for breach of promise of marriage in a case of Lony v. Langif 0' "W1 H1” Plaintiff being Mrs. Mildred Langworthy, whose marriage has "5011 declared null and void. The oflicial receiver having reported that

e bnk'“Pi= was in contempt in not filing any accounts and in not a"tend‘“B the Pfoctediugs in the bankruptcy, refused to allow the bankgupt to be represented on the inquiry. The registrar, holding that the u“”k_mPt had been wilfully and systematically in contempt, refused to bppfimt a d°'Y for hearing the above application. It was argued for the 0?';‘h1"-1Pt that he had never received notice of these proceedings, or even t . e Tecelfing order, and that the bankrupt wished to have an oppor

cg;gn;ft.l1-13 before the registrar and of shewing that he was not in

[graphic]

_Tira Counr (Lord Esriaa, l\I.R., LINDLEY and Loras. L.JJ.) dismissed the appeal. Th_ey held that, upon the facts, the bankrupt was in contempt, as he was wilfully staying away to defeat and delay his creditors. The bankrupt had been guilty of insolent behaviour towards the court, and was therefore in contempt. The court did not believe that he had any intention of showing that he was not guilty of contempt, or even of purging his contempt, but he intended still to stay away out of the control of the court, while at the same time he might be re resented by counsel and solicitor. The application must be refusoi£—Coimsi:i., Wimlow, Q, 0., and Yale Lee. Sonicrrons, G. S. g» II. Brandon.

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

This action was brought by the representatives of a deceased country solicitor against his former London agent for an account of moneys due from the defendant in respect of the agency, and the defendant had been ordered to pay to the plaintiffs a balance which had been found due from him. The defendant had failed to obey the order, and the plaintiffs moved to commit him for his default. It was contended that he was liable to arrest, as coming within the exceptions from the abolition of imprisonment for making default in payment of a sum of money which are contained in sub-sections 3 and 4 of section 4 of the Debtors Act, 1869. Sub-section 3 excepts “default by a trustee or person acting in a fiduciary capacity and ordered to pay by a court of equity any sum in his possession or under his control," and sub-section 4 excepts “default by a solicitor . . . in payment of a sum of money when ordered to pay the same in his character of an ofilcer of the court making the order."

N ORTH, J ., though under the cireiimstances of the oase he did not make an order of committal, was of opinion that the defendant came clearly within sub-section 3. But he expressed a doubt whether the defendant came within sub-section 4.—OOUNsBL, U00/cson, Q.C., and Woodfall ; T. L. Will-iiison.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

The plaintiffs were trustees (the mluis qua triutmt beingalso joined) for whom the defendant, a solicitor in Birmingham, had acted in an investment of certain of the trust moneys upon leasehold security. The defendant was employed in 1880 to find a good security for £500, and himself employed a Mr. Edwards to value the property now in question, consisting of manufacturing premises. The valuer reported that the property was a. suflicient security for £500, which sum the trustees advanced upon it. The int arest at once fell into arrear, the mortgagor became bankrupt, the property became unlet, and the trustees, being unable torealize, brought this action against their solicitor. The negligence imputed was that the defendant had neglected to inform Edwards, the valuer, of the terms of a tenancy under which one Smith held the premises of the mortgagor Ward. Edwards was instructed by the defendimt that Smith held at a rent of £80, and that there was no written agreement between him and Ward, whereas in fact there was a written agreement for a lease, under which the landlord was liable to pay the rates and taxes, amounting to over £20. In his evidence Edwards said that had he known the terms of this tenancy he should not have reported the property as a good security for £500. The defendant, on _ the other hand, had, at the commencement of the negotiations, mquired of the mortgagor the nature of the tenancy, and had been informed by him that Smith held as a yearly tenant at a rent of £80. At the completion of the mortgage, the mortgagor, being asked whether there was any written agreement in existence with reference to the tenancy, replied that these was none. _He also purported to convey “ free from incumbrances_.' The question, therefore, was whether the defendant had sufllciently instructed Ldwards in telling him what he had heard from the mortgagor, or whether, as the plaintiffs contended, he ought to_ have ascertained from Smith himself the terms of the tenancy. At the trial, which took place on the 2-lth_ of J une the jury found that the defendant had not made reasonable inquiriea as to the terms of Smith's tenancy. They found, further, that if such inquiry had been made the vaIuer's report would have been affected, supposing the agreement created a fourteen years’ lease, to the extent of £350 ; that the premises were a. good security for £150 ; that their actual value in 1880 was £300, and at present £200. The case was now argued on further consideration when it _was submitted Oll behalf of the plaintiffs that, on the findings of the Jury, they were entitled to judgment for £500, or at the least for £3_50. The recent case of leizroyd v. 7VIiitsl¢-y in the House of Lords was cited, as well as Craiy v. Watson (8 Beav.), C’/mpmim v. 6'liapmrm (9 Eq. 276), and other cases. On the other side it was argued that as the agreement between Ward and Smith contained a clause empowering the landlord to mortgage in his own nanieas owner, Ward was entitled to mortgage free of incumbrance, and the tenancy was in reality void as against mortgagees. Apart from this it was urged that there was no negligence, and that the defendant was not bound to make fiuther inquiries than he had done.

S'l‘Bl‘liEN, J ., said that, having regard, first of all, to the fact found by the jury that proper inquiries had not been made by ML F OWN! ; llflvillg

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

securitiitself; and, lastly, having regard to the fact that Mr-_ FOWRB knewt at his clients were trustees; taking all these considerations together, he was of opinion that he must give Judgment for the plaintiffs for £400—£350 as the difierence between the value of the security actually obtained and the sum which was to be advanced on it, and the remaining £50 as a round sum in consideration of arrears ot_ interest and other matters. His lordship arrived at this conclusion with some degree of doubt, and not wit out considerable regret, because it was certain that Mr. Fowke had acted quite bond _/ide. It had not been suggested that he had acted otherwise. Judgment was given accordingly, but his lordship granted a stay of execution on notice of appeal being given by Friday next.—Covxsm., Lumlvy Smith, Q.C., and Siinkr_i/,- Du;/dale, Q.C., and llfacmon-an.—Ti'm¢'s.

THE CORPORATION RECORDS.

Sis Jonx B. l\IOi\‘(‘KT0l\', the Town Clerk, has submitted to the Library Committee of the Corporation of London his eleventh annual report as to the condition oi the records of the Corporation in his custody, and the progress made in arranging, calendaring, and indexing them. The calendar of the second series of Hastings Rolls, known as “Pleas of Land," had been continued and carried down from the first year of the reign of King Edward IV. to the sixteenth year oi Elizabeth, and it formed a useful corollary to the Calendar of Deeds, recently completed to the first sci ics of rolls for the corresponding period. Mr. Maude had continued to devote himself to making an exhaustive index to all the names set out in the Calendar of Deeds. More than 45,000 slips had been written and alphabetically arranged, and the name of any party to a conveyance ini-olled in the Court of Hustings from s.n. 1272 to 1373 could now readily be found. Dr. Sharpe was preparing a calendar to the wills inrolled iu the Court of Hustings, and had completed a calendar of more than 2,000 wills inrolled between an. 1258 and 1348. The series continued down to A.D. 1688, after which year, for some reason that was not apparent, the inrolment of wills ceased in the Hustings, while that of deeds was continued down to the present day. The total number of wills inrolle_d amounted to alittle over 4,000. It was not too much to say that the existence of so large a number of early wills had been hitherto comparatively little known, notwithstanding their title to be considered a unique collection, unapproached by any other in thc kingdom, either in p_oint of number or interest. The benefit to be conferred on history and literature by rendering their contents more widely known could hardly be over-estimated. To take but a single illustration. It was matter of history that in_13-18 and 1349 tho City was visited by an exceptionally severe epidemic, known as “_the Black Death,” which is recorded to have can-ied ofi fifty thousand of its inhabitants. Nothing could be more signiiicant, or_aiford a better criterion of the efieot of the scourge on the citizens of London, than the extraordinary number of wills proved and mrolled in the Hustmgs at the court held on January 25, 1348, and subsequent courts throughout that year. It was far in excess of those inrolled for any similar period. In comparison with that, it was curious to note that in 1665, when the City was visited by “ the Great Plague," only one will was inrolled, and that a will nuncupative. _ That was to be fi°°°)!“ted f°!‘_ bl’ the custom oi proving and inrollwg wills in the 11511138 having by that 'l1|.’flB almost died. out. In the calendar now u11_et preparation everything which possessed any conceivable interest or importance was, within reasonable limits, included. These limits must Hfwélifllély expand as the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries were apalgfig SJ I 881i-he wills_o£ that period became of much greater length, have d :_dVBdllt:,Of their contents, if possible, increased. The Corporation andaaifi 15%] _ t])l(')l;lt the Calendar of Wills with_an exhaustive index dis _ti e in r uction bearing upon the early history of testamentary 11°51 0!! of 1'98-1 and personal property, and more especially the various

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

Mr. REGINALD J OHN Cusr, barrister, has been appointed Chief Commissioner of West India Incumbered Estates, in succession to the late Mr. James Fleming, Q C. Mr. Oust is the third son of the Hon. and Rev. Henry Cockayne Cust, and was born in 1828. He was educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, where he graduated as a wrangler and also in the second class of the Classical Tripos in 1852. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Easter Term, 1856, and he practises in the Chancery Division and as a convcyauoer. He has been for several years assistantcommissioner of West India Incumbered Estates.

Mr. EDWARD WINCFIELD, barrister, has been appointed AssistantCommissioner of West India Incumbered Estates, in succession to Mr. Reginald John Cust, who has been appointed Chief Commissioner. Mr. Wiugfield is the fourth son of Mr. John Muxloe Wingfleld, of Tickencotc, Rutlandsliire, and was born in 1834. He was educated at Winchester, and he was formerly fellow of New College, Oxford, where lie graduated frst class in Classics and second class in Mathematics in 1856. He was called to the bar at Lincoln’s-inn in Trinity Term, 1859. Mr. Wingfield formerly practised in the Court of Chancery, and he was for several years on the staif of the Law R¢‘]Jm‘ls. He has been an assistant undersecretary of State for the Colonies since 1878.

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

The Royal Assent; was given on Monday to the Water Companiofl (Regulation of Powers) Act, Public Libraries Acts Amendment Act, Incumbents Resignation Act, Crofters Holdings (Scotland) Act, First Offenders Act, Allotments and Cottage Gardens Compensation for Crops ACT» Markets and Fairs (Weighing of Cattle) Act, and a number of private and Provisional Orders Confirmation Acts.

To meet expenses incurred by the Local Government Board a B_i11 has been introduced by Mr. Ritchie to authorize the Board to make. with the consent of the Treasury, regulations prescribing the fees to be pl!-Id bi local authorities in respect of applications for the sanction of loans and for provisional orders, and also in respect of local inquiries held by_tl1fi Board’s inspectors. When a regulation is thus made by the Board it is 10 be laid before Parliament. Another provision of the Bill is that expenses paid by a local authority are not to be disallowed by a district auditor If they have been sanctioned by the Local Government Board.

The Lincoliishire estates of the late Lord Saye and Sela were oifered for sale by public auction at Spalding on Wednesday. The estate consisted of 2.731 acres Of arable and grass land and farmhouses, all being tithe free, and the freehold let at a yearly rental of £5,191. The estate was oiferqd in 9' hundmd 1°“, which include 23 farms of from 40 to 200 acres H1 extent. The attendance was large but very poor prices were offered. “"3 only half the lots were sold, many not receiving a bid. Altogether 395 acres 1 rood 25 poles were sold for £30 273 or an average of less than £40 an ucrc with buildings. ' '

For some weeks past a departmental committee nominated by we Government have been sitting for the purpose of inquiring into tllc manner in which the legal business of the Treasury is couduoted- The

[graphic]
[ocr errors]

committee consists of Sir Henry James, chairman, Lord Justice Bowen,

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

Mr. H. H. Fowler, Mr. John Hollams, and Mr. F. Mowatt, with Mr.
H. W. Loehnis as secretary. The inquiries of the committee have been
directed to secure a more eificacious and more economical conduct of legal
business in connection with the Treasury, which for such purpose includes
virtually all the Government departments. At the conclusion of Sir
Augustus Stephenson’s examination, which lasted for several days, the
committee adjourned for the vacation, to meet again at the end of October.

The Corporation of London and the recorder (Sir T. Chambers, (10.), are at present in controversy as to the filling up of the oflice of assistant judge of the llIayor’s Court, which became vacant some months ago on the death of Mr. Woodthorpe Brandon. The question forms the subject oi a report of the Law and City Courts Committee, who state that as some doubt was felt by them as to

the power of the recorder to appoint a permanent assistant judge of

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

oflice, they took the 0piDlO!1 of the Attorney-General and Mr. R. S.
Wright, with the recorder's, upon it. The Attorney-General and Mr

Wright’s opinion was as follows:—“ We are unable to advise that any B
assurance of perm_zinency_ can be given to a erson accepting the position

[ocr errors]

BIRCH. EUOENTUS, Victoria st, Westminster, Engineer. Sept 30. Coode & Co,
Bedfoi-d row

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Record) Act oi 1872 and the Order in Council. The language of the Act 0
appearstous rather toindicate that the person appointed is to be the

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Jndgeisto he free _to appoint a person selected by himself. The pro- C

vision of the Order in Council requiring that the period of time for which
the appointment is made shall be specified seems also to be more con-
sistentyzithatemporary rmlier than with a permanent appointnieiit.
The point is not free from doubt, but upon the whole we think that in
whatever form the appointment is made it will terminate on the retire-
ment nr_ death of the appointing judge.” The recorder declined to sivii

that opinion but said the form of ap ointment which he had drawn lgit

~ 7

the question open for consideratibn when the oflice of recorder
became vacant. The a pointment made by the recorder, and
approved by the Lord Chancellor, sought to constitute Mr. Francis
Roxburgb a permanent assistant judge of the Mayor's Court.
The committee submitted the appointment made by the recorder to the
Attorney-General and Mr. Wright, for them to advise as to its suificiency
and validity, and, if necessary, to settle such a form oi appointment as
would meet the rcquii-en. ents of the Act. The Attorney-General and Mr.
Wright expressed their opinion that the corporation could not properly be
advised to concur in the appointment in its present form, but that the
appointment should follow the language of the Act, and should conform
to the Order in Council by specifying the duty which the assistant judge
was to perform and the cause for his appointment and the period for
which the appointment is made. Looking to these opinions, the com-
mittee report that no other course is open to them but to recommend the
Common Council not to confirm the appointment made by the recorder.
The latter has intimated that if the corporation refuse to approve the
appointment in its present form he must ask the Lord Chancellor to
approve u form which names a term of years. So the matter stands until
alter the vacation, and meanwhile Mr. Roxburgh is acting temporarily as
assistantjudge in the court.

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

Ord July so _ ,
ALDERSON, JOHN, Shipioy, Yorks, Carter. Bradford. Pet Aug 3. Ord Aug B

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

DAVIS, WILLIAM, Walsall, Police Constable. Aug 15 at 11.30. Oil Rec, Walsall

DEWRURST, ANDREW, Great Harwood, Weaver. Aug 12 at 2 30. County court house, Blackburn _

DUCKITT, JANE. and DANIEL FERGUSON BERRY, Liverpool, Shipwrights. Aug 16 at 12. Off Ree. 35, Victoria st, Liverpool

ELLIS ROBERT, Bari ow in Buiness in Fuiness, Accountant. Aug 17 at 10. 2, Paxton ter. Barrow in Furness

FEATHERSTONE, MORRIS, Holme on Spalding Moor. Yorks, Farmer. Aug 12 at 12. Oil’ Rec. Lincoln's inn bldgs, Bowlalley lane. Hull

FREEMAN, WILLIAM CHARLES. Leadenhall st, Merchant. Aug 12 at 12. 33. Carey st. Lineoln’s inn fields

GOULSTONE, HENRY ALBERT. Yate, Gloucestershire, Innkeeper. Aug 16 at 12.30 Off Rec. Bank clibrs, Bristol

GREEN, JOHN, Rotherham, Yorks, Grocer. Aug 16 at 11.30. Oil? Rec, Figtice lane. Sheflield

GWYNN, WILLIAM. Cflsflll st, Spitalflelds, Coal Dealer. Aug 12 at 2.30. 33, Carey st, Lineoln’s nn

HALL. WILLIAM. Chorley, Lanes, Draper. Aug 12 at 2.30. Otf Ree, Bridge st, Manchester

HEMINGWAY. CAROLINE, Mirfleld, Yorks, Draper. Aug 12 at 3. Off Rec, Bank chbrs. Bailey

HILLS, JOHN, Rochester, Mariner. Aug 13 at 11.30. Off Rec, High st, Rochester

HOLM. FRITZ ALBRECHT (sefi estate), Grosser Burstah, Hamburg, Merchant Aug 30 at 11. Queen's otel, B rmingham

HONE, J AMEs HENRY HIATI‘, Preston on Stour, nr Stratford on Avon, Baker. Aug 12 at 11.30. Slatter & Co, solors, Stratford on Avon

HOWLETT, WILLIAM Tn0MAs, Birmingham, Hatter. Aug 15 at 3. 25, Colmore row. Birmingham _

HUCE, Jo%I>1I. llieatbop, Westmorland, Builder. Aug 12 at 12. King’s Arms Inn. enda

HUCK, WILLIAM, and HENRY HUCK, Endmoor, nr Kendal, Builders. Aug 12 at 11. King's Arms Inn, Kendal _

HUDSON. GEORGE, Kingston upon Hull, Tobaccomst. Aug 12 at 3. Oi! Ree Lineoln’s inn bldgs, Bowlalley lane, Hull _

J ARvIs, ‘l HOMAS, Derby, out of business. Aug 13 at 12. 23, Friar lane, Leices‘er

[ocr errors]

JOHNSON, GEORGE, Godalniiog, Chemist. Aug 16 at 11. Cannon st Hotel

LISSAMAN, WILLIAM, Leamington, Builder. Aug 16 at 2.45. Wright & Hassall, solors. Leamington

MAGUB. ROBERT WILLIAM. Cannon st rd. St George in the East, Licensed Vieuialler. Aug I2 at 11. 33, Carey st, Lincoln's inn fields

MATTHEW, JOSEPH, Great Malvern. Boarding House keeper. Aug I2 at 11. Oil Rec. Worcester

MORRISII. RICHARD WOOD, Leaminfiton. Boot Dealer. Aug 16 at 11.30. Edward Thomas Peirson, Oil‘ Rec, 17. ertford st, Coventry

PAILTHORPE. WILLIAM, Belgrave, Leicestcrshire, Builder. Aug 16 at 12.30. 23. F1 iar lane, Leicester

PASS, BENJAMIN, and HARRY ALBERT. Newcastle on Tyne, Goods Dealers. Aug 12 at 11.30. Oflf Ree, Pink lane. Newcastle on Tyne

PRITCHARD, THOMAS, New lane, Enfield, Baker. Aug 12 at 11. 16 Room, E0 and 31. St Swithin's lane _

REECE, GEORGE HENRY, Birmingham, Tobaceomst. Aug 18 at 11. 25, Colmore row, Birmingham ,

RICHARDS. JOHN, Festiniog, Merionethshire, Grocer. Aug 12 at 1. Queens Hotel, Blaenau Festiniog

ROLI.%3ON, BENJAMIN, York, Innkeeper. Aug 12 at 12. Off Rec, 17, Blake s‘.

[ocr errors]

on SMITH, THOMAS. Bi-Omsgrove, Baker. Aug 12 at 10.30. Off Ree, Worcester

SIIMMI-ins, EDWARD HORATIO (sep estate), Harborne, Staiiordshire, Glass Beveller . Aug 17 at ll. 25, Colmore row. Birmingham

SUMMERS. FREDERICK Gsonos (sep estate), Birmingham, Coal Merchant. A118 17 at 11. 25. Colmore row, Birmingham

BUMMERs, FREDERICK GEORGE, and EDWARD HORATIO Suiimnns, Birmingham. Glass Bevclleis. Allg 17 at 11. 25, Colmore row, Birmingham _ ,

SYKES. BENJAMIN, I iverpool, Gent. Aug 16 at 2. Oil’ Rec, 35, Victoria st, Liverpoo ~

TAYLOR, GEORGE SOIITRCOATE, Leeds, out of business. Aug 15 at 11. Olf Rec. 22, Park row. Leeds ,

WIIICIIER. FREDERICK J AMES, Tiinbiidge Wells, Grocer. Aug 12 at 1-2. Ban £Iuptcy bldgs. Portugal st, Lineoln’s inn fields

WILLIAMS. FRANCES, Kingston upon Hull, Fruit Dealer. Aug 16 at 3. Off R60. Lineoln’s inn bldgs, Bowlalley lane, Hull _

WILDE, W. C. K,, address unknown, Gent. Aug 12 at 11. 33, Carey sf». I-111901" "

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

“R MARKS. A, Old st, South Hackney, Furniture Dealer. High Court. Pet June June is. Ord Aug s Mrrcnnnuosas, JAMES HENRY, Newton Abbot, Tailor. Exoter. Pet Aug 2. Ord

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

HUNT, CHARLES, Stroud, Cabinetinaker. Gloucester. Pet Aug 6. Ord Aug a

J ONES, EVAN, Ruthln, Denbighshlre, Farmer. Wrexham. Pet Aug 4. Ord Aug 4 Munnooaxa, J suns, York, Painter. York. Pot Aug 6. Ord Aug 6

Nome. ROBERT Joim, Swansea, Bootmaker. Swansea. Pet Aug 4. Ord Aug 4 ORME, J onx, West Bromwlch, Staffs, Butcher. Oldbury. Pet Aug 6. Ord Aug 6 Paunm, Enwum, Bitten, Glouces, Draper. Bristol. Pet Aug 6. Ord Aug 6 PAYNE, James, Bath. Bootmaker. Bath. Pet Aug 4. Ord Aug 4

PiiiLi.iPs, WILLIAM, Hereford, Coal Agent. Hereford. Pet Aug 0. Ord Aug 6 PHLLIXT, (é DAWSON, Toksnhouse yard, Gent. High Court. Pet July 22. Ord

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Aug 6. Ord Aug 6
FIRST MEETINGS.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »