plaintiffs were entitled to a verdict with costs, and an injunction to restrain the carrying on of the hospital so as to be a nuisance.-Hill v. Managers of Metropolitan Asylum District, 40 L.T. 491.

(vii.) Q. B. Div.-Obligation to Remove Dust-Contract for Sale of Dust18 & 19 Vict., c. 120, s. 125.-The obligation imposed by s. 125 of the Metropolitan Management Act, 1855, on a vestry to remove dirt, ashes, &c., from houses in the parish extends only to dirt, ashes, and things ejusdem generis, and therefore a contract for sale by the vestry of the dust and refuse collected by them does not include broken glass, metal, &c., which may happen to be thrown into the dustbins emptied by the vestry.-Collins v. Paddington Vestry, 48 L.J. Q.B. 345; 27 W.R. 504.

(viii.) Ch. Div. F. J.-Party Wall-18 & 19 Vict., c. 122, s. 3.-A wall having a shed on one side and water-closets on the other: Held to be a party wall within the Metropolitan Building Acts, so far as the water. closets and shed were co-extensive.-Knight v. Pursell, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 412; 48 L.J. Ch. 395; 40 L.T. 391.

(ix.) Q. B. Div.-Valuation of Property-Supplemental List-32 & 33 Vict., c. 67. Where, under sec. 43 of 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, the mains and pipes of a waterworks company have been inserted in the quinquennial valuation list, a supplemental valuation list may be made under secs. 46 & 47 during the five years so as to include an increase in value of the same mains by reason of their connection with new houses.-Regina v. New River Co., L.R. 4 Q.B.D. 309; 48 L.J. M.C. 123; 40 L.T. 322; 27 W.R. 785.

(x.) Ex. Div.-Vestryman-Churchwarden-Bankruptcy -18 & 19 Vict., c. 120, ss. 2, 54.-A churchwarden who is, under sec. 2 of the Metropolitan Management Act, 1855, ex officio a member of a vestry, ceases to be so on bankruptcy, and is liable to a penalty if he continue to act as such member.-Leftly v. Monnington, 27 W.R. 787.

Mines:

(viii.) C. P. Div.-Agent-Certified Manager-Conviction-35 & 36 Vict., c. 76, s. 51.-The conviction and fine of a certified manager of a mine for a breach of the regulation in sec. 51, sub-sec. 1 of Mines Regulation Act, 1872, does not prevent the agent of the mine from being also convicted in respect of the same breach.-Wynne v. Forester, 40 L.T. 524. Mortgage :-

(xxii.) Ch. Div. V. C. B.—Annuity-Policy of Insurance-Redemption.— P., in consideration of £500, granted to N. an annuity for 99 years if P.'s wife should so long live, and P.'s wife, by the same deed, granted the rents and profits of property, to which she was entitled for her separate use, to N. during her life on trust to pay thereout the annuity and such premiums of insurance as therein mentioned, and subject thereto to account for the residue to the wife. The amount of the annuity was made up of the interest due on the £600 and the premiums payable for an insurance for £600 on P.'s wife, effected by N. P.'s wife having died: Held that N. was entitled to retain the whole of the policy monies, which, by reason of bonuses, amounted to more than £600.-Preston v. Neele, 40 L.T. 303; 27 W.R. 642.

(xxiii.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Equitable Mortgage-Sale or Foreclosure—15 & 16 Vict., c. 86, s. 48.—An equitable mortgagee, by deposit of deeds accompanied by an agreement to execute a legal mortgage, is entitled to either sale or foreclosure.-York Union Banking Co. v. Artley, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 205; 27 W.R. 704.

(xxiv.) C. A.—Foreclosure-Bankruptcy-Redemption.—An order having been made by the Court of Bankruptcy foreclosing the trustee of a bankrupt

in respect of mortgage property: Held, that the trustee was entitled to six months to redeem, though he had admitted that he had no assets of the bankrupt, and that as the mortgagee had not applied to the registrar for a sale, an order for sale could not be made on appeal.-Ex parte Fletcher, Re Hart, L.R. 10 Ch. D. 610; 27 W.R. 622.

(xxv.) Ch. Div. M. R.—Foreclosure-Sale-15 & 16 Vict., c. 86, s. 55.— The 55th sec. of the Chancery Procedure Act, 1852, does not authorise the Court in an ordinary foreclosure action to direct a sale on an interlocutory application.-London and County Banking Co. v. Dover, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 204; 48 L.J. Ch. 336; 27 W.R. 749.

(xxvi.) C. A.—Priority—Voluntary Deed-Consolidation-27 Eliz., c. 4.— Decision of F. J. (see Mortgage ix., p. 21) affirmed on first point, but held, that plaintiffs were entitled to consolidate.-Cracknall v. Janson, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 1; 40 L.T. 640.

:

(xxvii.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Redemption-Lost Deed-Indemnity—Interest. -Notice to redeem a mortgage having been given, a title deed was missing, and mortgagor brought an action for redemption and indemnity Held that the action was justifiable, though an offer of indemnity had been made; and it appearing that the lost deed was in the hands of a third party to whom defendant's former solicitor had fraudulently pledged it, leave was given to plaintiff to take proceedings to recover it: Held also that interest on the mortgage debt ceased to run on the day fixed for redemption by the notice.-James v. Rumsey, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 398; 48 L.J. Ch. 345; 27 W.R. 617.

(xxviii.) C. A.-Trust for Sale-Express Trust of Surplus-Statute of Limitations. Decision of V.C.M. (see Mortgage xxi., p. 88) reversed. -Johnson v. Mounsey, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 284; 27 W.R. 537.

(xxix.) Ch. Div. F. J.-Trust for Sale-Express Trust of Surplus-Statute of Limitations.-When twenty years have elapsed from entry by a mortgagee without any subsequent acknowledgment, mortgagor's right of redemption becomes extinct, and if the mortgage deed contains a power of sale with a trust of surplus proceeds for mortgagor, and the power has not been exercised within the twenty years from entry, the trust of the surplus proceeds becomes extinct.-Chapman v. Corpe, 27 W.R. 781.

Municipal Law:

(vii.) Q. B. Div.-Reformatory School-Cost of Clothing-29 & 30 Vict., c. 117, s. 23; 40 & 41 Vict., c. 21, s. 4.-The cost of clothing requisite for the admission of a youthful offender to a reformatory school under sec. 23 of Reformatory School Act, 1866, is included in the expenses provided for by sec. 4 of Prison Act, 1877.-Prison Commissioners v. Liverpool Corporation, L.R. 4 Q.B.D. 329; 48 L.J. Q.B. 436; 40 L.T. 680; 27 W.R. 799.

New South Wales, Law of :

(ii.) P. C.-Liability of Municipality for Non-repair of Drains.—Held that a municipality was liable for damages in respect of a nuisance in a highway, caused by the non-repair of a drain under their control.— Borough of Bathurst v. Macpherson, L.R. 4 App. 256.

Partition:

(iii.) C. A.-Sale-31 & 32 Vict., c. 40, ss. 3, 5.-Held reversing the decision of V.C.M. (see Partition i., p. 22), that a sale ought to be directed with liberty to all parties, other than those having the conduct of the sale, to bid.-Gilbert v. Smith, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 78; 48 L.J. Ch. 352; 40 L.T. 635; 27 W.R. 719.

(iv.) Ch. Div. V. C. B.-Sale-Discretion of Court-31 & 32 Vict., c. 40, s. 4.-Under sec. 4 of the Partition Act, 1868, though persons interested to the extent of a moiety request a sale, the Court has a discretion to grant or refuse the request.-Saxton v. Bartley, 27 W.R. 615.

(v.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Sale-Leave to Bid.-The Court will not, on an order for sale by auction in a partition action under the Acts of 1868 and 1876, give leave to bid at the auction to the party having the conduct of the sale.-Verrall v. Cathcart, 27 W.R. 645.

(vi.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Sale-Share of Married Woman-Election.—Where real estate is sold in a partition action, the share of the purchase-money belonging to a married woman may be paid out to her husband, she electing on her separate examination to have it treated as personalty.— Standering v. Hall, 48 L.J. Ch. 382; 27 W.R. 749.

Partnership:

(xiv.) C. P. Div.--Bill Drawn by One Partner-Liability.-Where a partnership is carried on in the name of an individual member of it, any note or other obligation signed by such member in his own name, is primâ facie presumed to be his note, and not that of the partnership.-Yorkshire Banking Co. v. Beatson, 48 L.J. C.P. 428; 40 L.T. 654.

Pier:

(i.) Ex.Div.-Toll-Exhibition of on Notice-board.-Where a Pier Act requires the exhibition on a board of the duties for the time being, authorized to be taken as therein before mentioned, and gives a schedule of maximum tolls, but allows of their being reduced and raised again by resolution of proprietors, the board must exhibit the tolls as fixed at the time in question.-Greyson v. Potter, L.R. 4 Ex. D. 142; 48 L.J. M.C. 86.

Poor Law:

(v.) Q. B. Div.-Rating Appeal-Valuation List-Notice of Objection-27 & 28 Vict., c. 39, s. 1.—An appellant who has given notice of objection to the valuation list and failed to obtain relief before a poor rate is made in conformity with the list, is not bound to give a fresh notice of objection after the rate is made in order to entitle him to appeal.-Regina v. Wiltshire Justices, L.R. 4 Q.B.D. 326.; 40 L.T. 681.

(vi.) Q. B. Div.-Settlement-39 & 40 Vict., c. 61, s. 35.-Held that a pauper born in 1840, who had never acquired a settlement in her own right, acquired her father's settlement, which was a birth settlement which could be ascertained without inquiring into his derivative settlement. Hereford Union v. Warwick Union, 48 L.J. M.C. 111; 40 L.T. 588; 27 W.R. 506.

(vii.) Q. B. Div.-Settlement-Child under Seven-39 & 40 Vict., c. 61, s. 34. The pauper was an illegitimate child born in the parish of R. When the child was a fortnight old it was placed by its mother in the care of people who lived with it for six years in the parish of S.: Held that there was sufficient ground for finding that the pauper was settled at S. -Regina v. Leeds Union, L.R. 4 Q.B.D. 323; 40 L.T. 521; 27 W.R. 708.

Power of Appointment:

(iv.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.--Exclusive Power-Condition of Forfeiture-Remoteness.-The donee of an exclusive power of appointment by will among her children, appointed the property among the children in certain shares, with a proviso that if during her lifetime or after her death any of them should marry a person not belonging to the Jewish religion, or should forsake the Jewish religion, then such child should

forfeit all share in the trust premises, and the forfeited share should go over to the other children then living: Held that the forfeiture clause was valid so far as it was expressed to take effect in the lifetime of the appointor, but void for remoteness so far as it purported to affect after the appointor's death the share of a child born after the death of the donor of the power.-Hodgson v. Halford, 27 W.R. 545.

Practice :

(cxci.) C. A.-Appeal-Costs.-When on an appeal respondents have given notice that they intend to apply to have the judgment below varied, and the appeal is dismissed, appellants will be ordered to pay the costs of the appeal, except such as were occasioned by the notice.-The Lauretta, L.R. 4 P.D. 25; 40 L.T. 444.

(excii.) C. A.-Appeal-Second Notice.-Defendants having given notice of appeal from a decree for a particular day, omitted to set it down till that day, and, on finding out their mistake, gave a second notice, which was duly set down: Held that they were entitled to proceed on the second notice.-Norton v. L. & N. W. Rail. Co., L.R. 11 Ch. D. 118; 40 L.T. 597; 27 W.R. 773.

(cxciii.) C. A.-Appeal—Security for Costs-Insolvency—Ord. 58, r. 15.—When an appellant is insolvent, a moderate sum should, if asked for, be offered, and, if offered, accepted as security for costs of appeal.-The Constantini, 27 W.R. 747.

(cxciv.) C. A.—Appeal― Setting down—Ord. 58, r. 8.—Notice of appeal from an interlocutory order was given by defendants within twenty-one days from the day on which the order was made. The order was not drawn up till more than a month afterwards, and as soon as it was drawn up, defendants set down the appeal: Held that as it was plaintiff's duty to draw up the order, he could not object to the appeal not being in time. -Goodbarne v. Fothergill, L.R. 10 Ch. Div. 613; 40 L.T. 408; 27 W.R. 587.

(cxcv.) C. A.-Appeal-Stay of Proceedings-Patent Action.-In an action to restrain infringement of letters patent, an injunction was granted against defendant, and an account directed of profits made by him in the sale of goods infringing the patent. Defendant having given notice of appeal, the appeal was ordered to be advanced, and proceedings stayed till the hearing.-Adair v. Young, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 136; 40 L.T. 598. (excvi.) C. A.-Appeal from Chamber-Time-Long Vacation—Ord. 54, r. 6.An appeal from an order of a judge in chambers after the expiration of eight days is too late, although such order was made in the long vacation, and no Divisional Court sat during the eight days succeeding the date of the order.-Runtz v. Sheffield, L.R. 4 Ex. D. 150; 48 L.J. Ex. 385; 40 L.T. 539.

(excvii.) C. P. Div.-Appeal from Master-Time-Ord. 54, r. 4-Ord. 57, r. 6.— Where a summons on appeal to a Judge at Chambers from the master is not made returnable within the four days allowed by Ord. 54, r. 4, the Court or a judge has a discretionary power to enlarge the time.-Gibbons v. London Financial Association, 27 W.R. 619.

(cxcviii.) Q. B. Div.-Appeal from County Court-Garnishee Order-30 & 31 Vict., c. 142, s. 13; 38 & 39 Vict., c. 50, s. 6.-There is no right of appeal from the decision of a County Court Judge in the matter of a garnishee order.-Mason v. Wirral, 27 W.R. 676.

(cxcix.) Ex. Div.-Appeal from Inferior Court-Time-Ord. 58, r. 19.-Appeals from inferior Courts must be entered within the time given on the notice of appeal for the hearing.—Donovan v. Brown, L.R. 4 Ex. D. 148; 48 L.J. Ex. 456; 27 W.R. 648.

N

(cc.) C.A.-Charging Order-Unascertained Amount.-By a decree plaintiffs were declared entitled to one-fifth share of the proceeds of a sale, and an account and payment to them of what should be found due with their costs was ordered: Held that they were not entitled to a charging order or stop order on a fund in Court in another action belonging to the same defendants. Widgery v. Tepper, 48 L.J. Ch 367.

(cci.) C. A.-Costs-Admiralty Appeal.-Semble in future the appellant in suc. cessful admiralty appeals will have the costs of the appeal.-The Swansea v. The Condor, L.R. 4 P.D. 115; 40 L.T. 442; 27 W.R. 748.

(ccii.) P. D. A. Div.-Costs-Collision.-Cargo owners, whose cargo had been lost through a collision, brought an action against the vessel which had come into collision with the vessel carrying their cargo, and both vessels were found to blame: Held that the defendants must pay the costs of the action.-The City of Manchester, 40 L.T. 591; 27 W.R. 697. (cciii.) Q. B. Div.-Costs-Inferior Court-Judicature Act, 1873, s. 91, Ord. 55. -Under sec. 91 of Judicature Act, 1873, Ord. 55 is applied to proceedings in the Liverpool Court of Passage.-King v. Hawksworth, L.R. 4 Q.B.D. 371; 27 W.R. 660.

(cciv.) C. A.-Costs-Divisional Court-39 & 40 Vict., c. 59, s. 17-Ord. 55.— When an action or issue has been tried by a jury, the Divisional Courts have a separate power, co-ordinate with that of the judge at the trial, to make an order to deprive the successful party of his costs, and no appeal lies from such order: sec. 17 of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1876, is directory only so far as relates to the transaction of business before a single judge. Myers v. Defries; Siddons v. Lawrence, 48 L.J. Ex. 446; 27 W.R. 791.

(ccv.) Ch. Div. F. J.-Costs-Partition.—In a partition action where plaintiffs and defendants were absolutely entitled to the whole of an estate which was partitioned: Held that the costs of the action should be borne by the parties rateably in proportion to the value of their shares. -Bowes v. Marquis of Bute, 27 W.R. 750.

(ccvi.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Costs-Partnership Action-Misconduct of Partner.— Though the costs of a partnership action, occasioned by no fault on either side, will be ordered to be paid out of the partnership assets, yet, where the action has been rendered necessary by the misconduct of either party, the Court will order that party to pay the costs.-Hamer v. Giles, 48 L.J. Ch. 508.

(ccvii.) Ch. Div. V. C. H.-Costs-Sheriff-Failure to make Return.-An under-sheriff having failed to make a return to writ of fi. fa. after repeated applications, the sheriff was ordered to pay the costs of the order nisi made on ex parte motion and of the order made on motion of course.-Hall v. Ley, 27 W.R. 750.

(ccviii.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Costs-Set-off-Award-Solicitor's Lien.-By an arbitrator's award in an action, plaintiff was ordered to pay a sum of money to defendant, and defendant was ordered to pay plaintiff part of his costs when taxed: Held that defendant was entitled to have the debt set off against the taxed costs, and that this right was not affected by the solicitor's lien for costs.-Pringle v. Gloag, L.R. 10 Ch. D. 676; 48 L.J. Ch. 380; 40 L.T. 512; 27 W.R. 574.

(ccix.) Ch. Div. M. R.-Costs-Taxation-Counsel's Fees. In taxing costs of an action in the Chancery Div. refreshers to counsel should be allowed for every day, after the first day, occupied by the trial when the evidence is taken orally, but not when it is taken by affidavit.Harrison v. Wearing, L.R. 11 Ch. D. 206; 48 L.J. Ch. 365; 27 W.R. 526. (ccx.) C. A.-Counter-Claim-Third Party-Ord. 22, r. 5; 16, r. 17.-In answer to a claim by a company for money lent, defendant set up a