EQUITABLE MORTGAGEE-POSSESSION - MORTGAGE OF THEATRE-MANAGER-FORM OF ORDER.-In a case of Dallas v. Bagholt, before the Master of the Rolls on the 5th inst., a question arose as to the order an equitable mortgagee of a theatre and properties was entitled to where he desired to take possession of the theatre and to carry on the same, and where the court had already appointed a person receiver, and one of the mortgagees manager, of the mortgaged property. The mortgagee appointed manager had refused the receiver admittance to the theatre, and a motion was now made to commit him for his contempt, and the actual contempt was not, in fact, denied. The motion also .extended to restrain the two mortgagors from interfering with the receiver, and asked that possession might be given to the mortgagee. The contention on the part of the mortgagee manager was that, inasmuch as the court had already appointed him manager, it could not alter the order so as to give the plaintiff possession, to which, moreover, he was not entitled. The plaintiff desired to continue the theatre open, and offered to do so at his own risk. JESSEL, M.R., was of opinion that the proper order to make would be to appoint the receiver also manager, and the defendant must at once give him possession of the theatre. The order had not yet been drawn up, and, therefore, he could alter it; but even if it had been drawn up the manager would only have been appointed "until further order," and he could now appoint another manager. The plaintiff must, however, undertake to be personally responsible for any loss to the defendants occasioned by his keeping open the theatre.

PRACTICE-SALE OUT OF COURT BY RECEIVER-SALE TO ONE OF THE PARTIES TO THE ACTION-MOTION IN THE ACTION TO ENFORCE THE SALE.-In a case of Fowler v. Murray, before the Master of the Rolls, on the 5th inst., the receiver in the action had, by the authority of all the parties, sold the partnership property by public auction, and the plaintiff was declared the purchaser. Subsequently the defendant declined to complete, on the ground of some fresh arrangement with the receiver, which had not been carried out. The plaintiff now moved in the action that the sale might be confirmed, and that the defendant might be ordered to complete, and that he might be at liberty to pay the purchase-money into court. The objection was taken that the motion was irregular as being to confirm a sale out of court, and that an action for specific performance of the agreement was necessary. JESSEL, M.R., said he should be sorry if he had not jurisdiction to confirm a sale between the parties to an action, all of whom were sui juris. He considered he had ample power to make the order asked for, the parties all being before him, and he should accordingly do so with costs.

COMPANY-WINDING UP BY HIGH COURT-PREVIOUS PETITION IN PALATINE COURT-JURISDICTION TO REFER PETITION TO PALATINE COURT.-In the case of Re Northern Counties of England Fire Insurance Company, before the Master of the Rolls on the 6th inst., a petition was presented by a creditor for a winding-up order, and a previous petition for a similar object had been presented to the Palatine Court. The creditor who had presented the Palatine petition opposed the petition before the Master of the Rlls, and submitted that the proper course was to refuse that petition and refer the matter to the Palatine Court for a winding up. The company had commenced an action in the court of Malins, V.C., to restrain the proceedings in the Palatine Court, on the ground of their solvency, and that the petitioner's debt was disputed, but Malins, V.C., refused the motion, being unwilling to interfere with the proceedings in the Palatine Court. JESSEL, M.R., said he should have been glad to refer the proceedings to the Palatine Court, but he did not consider he had any power to do so. As all the advertisements for the petition had been issued, and the other necessary steps taken for a winding-up petition in his court, he did not think he should be justified in refusing the petition, and he should therefore make the usual compulsory order to wind up the company.

MORTGAGE POWER OF SALE-SALE AFTER PAYMENT OF MORTGAGE DEBT, BUT BEFORE TRANSFER.-In a case of Mash v. Eads, before Fry, J., on the 8th inst., the action

was brought to set aside a sale which had been made under a power of sale in a mortgage, it being alleged that the sale had been made at an undervalue, and otherwise im. properly. One point taken was this. The sale was made by a person who had paid off the original mortgagee, but who had not actually obtained a transfer of the mortgage. And it was contended that, in such a state of circumstances, the power of sale was suspended-that it could not be exercised by a person who had not become a legal transferee or assign of the mortgage. FRY, J., overruled the objection, on the ground that, after payment of the mortgage debt, the original mortgagee was a mere trustee of the power for the person who had paid him off, and was bound to exercise it at his direction. The action was dismissed on its merits.

COSTS-TAXATION-APPLICATION TO REVIEW-MOTION OR SUMMONS.-In a case of Millard v. Burroughs, an application was made to Fry, J., on the 8th inst., by way of motion, to review the taxing master's taxation of costs, and the question was raised whether the application ought to not to have been made by summons. The action had been transferred to Fry, J., for the purpose of trial, and had been tried by him, and he held that it was more convenient that the application should be made to him, than to the judge to whom the action was originally attached, and that it was properly made by way of motion.

PRACTICE-ALTERNATIVE PLEADING-LIBEL-JUSTIFICATION AND PAYMENT INTO COURT.-In Hawksley v. Bradshaw application was made to the Queen's Bench Division, on the 4th inst., to set aside an order made by Field, J., at chambers. The action was for libel in a newspaper. The defendant, in his statement of defence, admitted the

publication of the words, but denied the inuendo imputed to them, and said that the statements were true and a fair comment on a public man; in the alternative he said that he had publicly apologized in his newspaper for the statements, if they were defamatory, which he did not admit they were, and finally paid forty shillings into court. Master Hodgson had ordered the alternative plea of apology and payment into court to be struck out. On appeal from his order to Field, J., that judge allowed the plea to stand, and it was from this decision that the plaintiff now appealed. For the defendant, it was urged that, under the Judicature Acts and Orders, several inconsistent matters might now be pleaded in a statement of defence. The court would not interfere, or strike out any matter, except such as was embarrassing or scandalous, which was not the case here. Reliance was placed on Berdan v. Greenwood (26 W. R. 902, L. R. 3 Ex. D. 51) as an authority in favour of this contention. The court (COCKBURN, C.J., and MANISTY, J.) were of opinion that justification and an apology and payment into court could not be pleaded simultaneously. Moreover, in this case the statement of defence was calculated to embarrass the plaintiff, and, on that ground also, the plea of payment must be struck out.

REVISING BARRISTER NEGLECT OR REFUSAL ΤΟ STATE A CASE-REGISTRATION ACT, 1878 (41 & 42 VICT. C. 26) s. 37-WRITTEN NOTICE TO REVISING BARRISTER CONDITION PRECEDENT REGISTRATION ACT, 1843 (6 & 7 VICT. c. 18) s. 42.-In the Matter of Bane and others, before the Common Pleas Division on the 8th inst., was a case in which a rule had been obtained calling upon a revising barrister to show cause why he should not state a case under 41 & 42 Vict. c. 26, s. 37, which provides that, if any person feels aggrieved by a revising barrister neglecting or refusing to state a case, he may, within one month after such neglect or refusal, apply to the High Court of Justice, upon affidavit of the facts, for a rule calling upon the revising barrister to show cause why a rule should not be made directing the appeal to be entertained and the case to be stated. An affidavit was produced in court made by the revising barrister, and also contradictory ones made by solicitors acting for the voters concerned. The following were the points involved in the case(1) Whether the application for a rule calling on the revising barrister to show cause was made within one month after the alleged refusal, as required by section 37 of last year's Registration Act. (2) Whether the above-mentioned

conflicting affidavits between the revising barrister and the different solicitors should be admitted or not. (3) Whether a written notice of appeal against the revising barrister's decision, mentioned in 6 & 7 Vict. c. 18, s. 42 (but admitted not to have been given in this case), was a condition precedent to the revising barrister being called upon to state a case. The court (GROVE and LOPES, JJ.) rested their judgment chiefly upon the first point, and dismissed the appeal, with costs, upon the ground that the application for a rule was made too late-i.e., more than a month after the neglect or refusal of the revising barrister to state a case. As to the second point, the court refused to allow the conflicting affidavits. Such a course, they said, would bring the office of revising barrister into contempt, and shake confidence in one who was in the position of a judge, and whose mere word should, therefore, suffice. The third point was not necessary to the determining this case, but the court gave an extra-judicial opinion upon it, on account of its importance. They held that, on the proper construction of 6 & 7 Vict. c. 18, s. 42, a written notice of appeal was a condition precedent to the revising barrister stating a

case.

an

PRACTICE-WRIT SPECIALLY INDORSED-DEMAND OF PARTICULARS BY DEFENDANT.-Godden v. Corsten, before the Common Pleas Division on the 8th inst., was appeal from chambers. The amount alleged to be due was specially indorsed on the writ, and credit was given for £61 odd for work, and £180 odd for materials. The defendant demanded particulars of these amounts to enable him to include a counter-claim in his statement of defence. A master decided that the plaintiff need not give the particulars asked for; Lopes, J. reversed this decision, and ordered particulars to be given. The court (LORD COLERIDGE, Č.J., and LINDLEY, J.) affirmed the decision of Lopes, J., holding that the cases on the subject decided before the Judicature Act did not now apply.

Obituary.

MR. THOMAS KINGDON KINGDON, Q.C. Mr. Thomas Kingdon Kingdon, Q.C., Recorder of Bristol, died at his residence, 3, Clarendon-road, Kensington, on the 2nd inst, after a somewhat long illness, at the age of 67. Mr. Kingdon was born in 1812, and was educated at Exeter College, Oxford, where he graduated second class in Litera Humaniores in 1834. He practised for many years as a special pleader, and was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Hilary Term, 1848, when he joined the Western Circuit. Mr. Kingdon had a high reputation as a pleader, and his chambers were much resorted to by students, the present Mr. Justice Field being one of his former pupils. He became a Queen's Counsel in 1866, and had a fair share of leading business on circuit, being a very sound lawyer, though without any pretence to eloquence. In 1872, he succeeded Mr. Bere, Q.C. (the present judge of the Cornwall County Courts) as recorder of the city of Bristol, which office he retained until his death. He was also judge of the Tolzey Court of that city.

It is stated that Mr. Charles Greville Prideaux, Q.C., of the Western Circuit, has been appointed to the recordership of Bristol, vacant by the death of Mr. Kingdon, Q.C.; that the recordership of Exeter, held by Mr. Prideaux, has been conferred upon Mr. A. J. H. Collins, Q.C.; and that Mr. G. D. Warry has been nominated to the recordership of Portsmouth in place of the late Mr. Serjeant Cox.

On Tuesday, at the Middlesex Sessions, Charles Blake, a solicitor at Newport, Monmouthshire, was charged with having obtained £100 from Eugene Wason, a solicitor at 62, Lincoln's-inn-fields, and also having attempted to obtain by false pretences £300 from the same person under circumstances which we have previously stated. The jury found the prisoner guilty, but strongly recommended him to mercy, and he was sentenced by Mr. Prentice to six months' imprisonment, with hard labour.

Societies.

SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION. The usual monthly meeting of the Board of Directors of this association was held at the Law Institution, Chancerylane, London, on Wednesday, the 10th inst., the following directors being present:-Messrs. Sidney Smith (in the ch air), Asker (Norwich), Brook, Hedger, Mellersh (Godalming), Paterson, Pennington, Rickman, Roscoe, and Veley (Chelmsford); Mr. Eiffe, secretary. A sum of £215 was distributed in grants of relief to necessitous members of the profession and their families; eleven new members wereadmitted, and other general business transacted.

LAW ASSOCIATION.

At the usual monthly meeting of the directors, held at the hall of the Incorporated Law Society, Chancery-lane, on Thursday, December 4, the following being present, viz., Mr. Desborough (chairman), and Messrs. Boodle, Burges, Burt, Clabon, Finch, Hedger, Scadding, Styan, Tylee, and A. B. Carpenter (secretary), two new members were elected, and the ordinary general business was transacted.

Law Student's Journal.

UNITED LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.

A joint debate between the members of the above society and the members of the Law Students' Debating Society, was held at Clement's-inn Hall, on the evening of Wednesday last, when the subject for discussion was "Is it desirable to establish a system of compulsory registration of title to land." Messrs. C. Parsons and R. G. Templer, of the United Law Students' Society, respectively opened and seconded the motion in the affirmative, while Messrs. H. G. Bower and A. E. Hemsley, of the Law Students' Debating Society, replied and seconded the negative. An animated discussion ensued, in which Messrs. T. Bateman Napier (Law Students' Debating Society), A. D. Maclaren (United Law Students' Society), and Neale (Law Students' Debating Society) supported, and Messrs. W. C. Owen (United Law Students' Society) and D. A'B. Collyer (United Law Students' Society) opposed the motion. Mr. C. Parsonsreplied, and the chairman, Mr. W. Dowson, having summed up, the motion was put to the vote, and lost by a majority

of four votes.

BIRMINGHAM LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. A meeting of the above society was held in the Law Library on Tuesday evening, December 2, Mr. W. H. Stanbury in the chair. After the election of new members, and the passing of a resolution entitling honorary members of the society for five years after becoming barristers or solicitors to the same privileges of removing books from the library as ordinary members, on payment of a slightly increased subscription, a debate took place on the following moot of sale which requires him to admit facts which the vendor point:-"] "Is a purchaser of real estate bound by a condition knows to be untrue?"-Best v. Hamund, 48 L. J. Ch. 503; on appeal, 23 SOLICITORS' JOURNAL, p. 754, 27 W. R. 742, L. R. 12 Ch. D. 1; Broad v. Munton, 27 W. R. 547; on appeal 23 SOLICITORS' JOURNAL, pp. 557, 815 (article), 27 W. R. 826, L. R. 12 Ch. D. 131. The speakers on the affirmative were Messrs. T. M. Whitehouse, jun., Steere, and Freeman, and on the negative Messrs. O'Connor, Hayes, and B. Smith. After a summing up by the chairman the question was put and carried in the negative. A vote of thanks to the chairman concluded the meeting.

Appointments, Etc.

Mr. JOHN DUNNINGTON FLETCHER, barrister, has been appointed Deputy-Assistant Judge of the Middlesex Sessions, in succession to the late Mr. Serjeant Cox. Mr. Fletcher is an M.A. of Christ's College, Cambridge, and he was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Easter Term, 1845. He practises on the Northern Circuit, and is a magistrate for Middlesex.

Mr. BENJAMIN HARFIELD, solicitor, has been appointed Deputy-Coroner for Southampton, his father, Mr. Robert Harneld, being coroner for the borough.

Mr. THOMAS FREDERICK IVENS, solicitor (of the firm of Ivens & Morton), of Kidderminster, has been elected Clerk to the Kidderminster Burial Board, in succession to Mr. Henry Saunders, deceased. Mr. Ivens was admitted a solicitor in 1859.

Mr. FREDERICK ARTHUR LITTLE, solicitor and notary, of Bombay, has been appointed to act as Government Solicitor and Public Prosecutor for the Bombay Presidency.

Sir CHARLES SARGENT, Knight, one of the judges of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, has been appointed to act as Chief Justice of Bombay, during the absence of Sir Michael Roberts Westropp. Sir C. Sargent is the youngest son of the late Mr. William Sargent, and he was born in 1821. He was formerly fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, where he graduated as fifth wrangler in 1843. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Michaelmas Term, 1848, and he practised for several years in the Court of Chancery. He was appointed a member of the Supreme Council of Justice of the Ionian Islands in 1858, and Chief Justice of the Ionian Islands in 1860, when he received the honour of knighthood. He has been a Puisne Judge of the Bombay High Court since 1866.

Mr. WILLIAM M. SCHARLIEB, barrister, has been appointed a Police Magistrate for the Town of Madras. Mr. Scharleib was called to the bar at the Middle Temple in Michaelmas Term, 1865, and has been for several years assistant secretary to the Judicial and Legislative Departments of the Madras Government.

MR. LEOFRIC TEMPLE, Q.C., succeeds Mr. Fletcher as Deputy Recorder of Liverpool. Mr. Temple is the son of the late Mr. Christopher Temple, Q.C., Chancellor of the County Palatine of Durham, and judge of county courts in Lancashire. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Easter Term, 1843, and is a member of the Northern Circuit. He was, for several years, one of the revising barristers for Lancashire, and became a Queen's Counsel in 1872. Mr. Temple is a bencher of Lincoln's-inn. He is the author (jointly with the late Mr. Tompson. Chitty) of a work on "The Law of Carriers," and he was one of the editors of the last editions of "Chitty's Precedents of Pleading."

Mr. JOHN CHARLES WARNES, solicitor (of the firm of Lawton & Warnes), of Eye, has been appointed Clerk to the Hartismere Board of Guardians, Assessment Committee, Rural Sanitary Authority, and School Attendance Committee, and also Superintendent Registrar for the district of Hartismere.

In our issue of the 15th ult., Mr. Thomas Stephenson, solicitor, is stated to have been chosen Mayor of Beverley. The gentleman elected to the above office is Thomas Stephenson, Esq., of Beverley, who is no: connected with the firm of Eldridge & Stephenson.

DISSOLUTIONS OF PARTNERSHIP. RICHARD HUNTER, JOHN HUNTER, EDMUND CHILD HAYNES, ARTHUR JOHN CAMPBELL GWATKIN, and ROBERT LEWIN HUNTER, solicitors, 9, New-square, Lincoln's-inn (Hanters, Gwatkin, & Haynes). October 1. (Gazette, December 5.)

MASKELL WILLIAM PEACE, HENRY ACKERLEY, and WILLIAM APPLETON, solicitors, Wigan (Peace, Ackerley, & Appleton), so far as the said William Appleton is concerned. November 7. Maskell William Peace and Henry Ackerley for the future will carry on the business on their own accourt under the firm of Peace, Ackerley, & Co. (Gazette, December 5.)

WALTER JAMES SCOTT and EDWARD WILKINS, solicitors, North Walsham (Scott & Wilkins). November 29. (Gazette, December 9.)

Companies.

WINDING-UP NOTICES. JOINT STOCK COMPANIES.

LIMITED IN. CHANCERY.

BRITISH MINING AND MILLING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for win 1ing up, presented Dec 3, directed to be heard before the M.R., on Dec 13. Musgrave, Queen Victoria st, solicitor for the petitioner ELGAR SILVER LEAD MINING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented Nov 29, directed to be heard before the M. R. on Dec 13. Jones and Co, Lincoln's inn fields, agents for Hughes and Sons, Aberystwith, solicitors for the petitioner TINEMOUTH AQUARIUM AND WINTER GARDEN COMPANY, LIMITED.— V.C. Hall has fixed Dec 15, at 12, at his chambers, for the appointment of an official liquidator

WRECK RECOVERY AND SALVAGE COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, preserted Dec 2, directed to be heard before V.C. Malins, on Dec 5. Hewlett, Essex st, Strand, solicitor for the petitioner [Gazette, Dec. 5.] CROMER WATERWORKS COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented Dec 5, directed to be heard before V.C. Hall, on Dec 19. Carritt and Son, Fenchurch st, agents for Hansell, Norwich, solicitor for the petitioners

SLATE COMPANY, LIMITED.-The M.R. has fixed Dec 19, at 12, at his chambers, for the appointment of an official liquidator

[Gazette, Dec. 9.]

In this matter a rule had been granted, at the instance of the Incorporated Law Society, calling upon the solicitor to show cause why he should not be struck off the roll, upon the ground that he had been convicted at the Birmingham Quarter Sessions for obtaining money by false pretences, and sentenced to three months' hard labour.

Murray now moved that this rule should be made absolute, and stated that the solicitor had written to Mr. Justice Grove asking that the case might stand over until he was released from prison in January next. This application he (Mr. Murray) was instructed to oppose.

GROVE, J.—If such a precedent were once established, solicitors who are sent to prison for a criminal offence would practically have an indefinite time for showing cause.

Murray. And there is no precedent for such an application; in fact, there is authority against it.

LOPES, J.-And there would be this inconvenience, that fession by means of a clerk. a solicitor whilst he was in prison could carry on his pro

Murray.-Many inconveniences would arise from this course being adopted, and, further, it should be remembered that formerly a conviction against a solicitor was sufficient for at once granting a rule absolute.

GROVE, J., thought that this rule should be made absolute. It was an irregular thing for this solicitor to write to a judge; and besides he did not say what his defence would be, but only that when out of prison he would have more time to prepare his defence. If they were to permit the delay asked for, it would lead to this, that a solicitor convicted of an offence would not be struck off the roll until the time of his punishment had expired. Such a practice would lead to great inconvenience.

Rule absolute.-Daily Telegraph.

BUNN, WILLIAM, Ipswich, Gent. Jan 7. Westhorp, Ipswich
DAVY, JOHN HENRY, Long Acre, Printer. Jan 15. Gole, Lime st
DEEDES, JULIUS, The Vicarage, Marden, Kent. Jan 14. Philpott and
Wood, Cranbrook

GIBSON, HENRY JAMES, Mincing lane, Chemical Merchant. Dec 31.
Tippetts and Co, Great st Thomas Apostle, Cheapsid

GRADY, GEORGINA LUCY, Elton, Limerick. Dec 31. Manning, Great George st, Westminster

GRAY, SAMUEL, sen, Harborne, Stafford, Farmer. Jan 1. Rowley, Birmingh am

GILSON, HENRY, Timperley, Chester, Gent. Jan 5. Whitworth. Manchester

GREEN, ANNE ELIZA, The Mount, Hadley. Jan 7. Wilde and Co, College-hill

KARRIS, HENRY, Leadenhall st, East India Agent. Jan 31. Holbrook, Cheapside

HARRI, WILLIAM, Croydon, Surrey, Builder. Jan 23. Drummonds and Co, Croydon

HARRISON, JOHN VICKERS, Steward's-terrace, Battersea Park, Painter. Dec 31. Whately and Co, Chancery-lane

HEADINGTON, WILLIAM, White Waltham, nr Maidenhead, Farmer, Dec 26. Clutton and Haines, Serjeant's-inn, Fleet st

HENDERSON, Rev. JAMES HENRY, Ipswich, Clerk. Jan 7. Westhorp, Ipswich

HIRST, WILLIAM, Woodhouse, Leeds. Jan 1. Middleton and Sons, Leeds

HOLE, EMANUEL, Broadwoodwidger, Devon, Retired Farmer. Dec 31. White and Dingley, Launceston

HUGHES, JAMES WILLIAM WYNNE, Henblas, Denbigh, Gent. Jan 1 Lloyd and Roberts, Ruthin

KEARSLEY, THOMAS HARVEY, Green st, Grosvenor sq, Esq. Jan 1. Park. and Co, Essex -t, 8 rand

KIDD, ROBERT, North Shields, Solicitor. Feb 1. Ingledew and Dagget, Newcastle-upon-Tyne

MA SON, EDITH, Lee, Kent. Jan 15. Gole, Lime st

MCLACHLAN, ARCHIBALD, Hatherley Hall, Cheltenham, Esq. Dec 31. Rose and Fry, Great George st, Westminster

MILLS, CHARLES, Plumstead, Kent, Farmer. Dec 20. Hudson and Co, Bucklersbury

NEWSON, ELIZABETH GOSNALL, Ipswich.

wich

Jan 7. Westhorp, Ips

ARCHER, HENRY, West Hill, Putney, Tobacco Manufacturer. Dec 9. Keene and Marsland, Mark-lane

AUSTIN, THOMAS, Brighton, Timber Merchant. Jan 31. Stevens and Son, Brighton

BANKS, AMELIA, Leghorn, Italy. Jan 15. Peacock and Goddard,
South sq, Gray's-inn

BELL, JAMES, Liverpool, Grocer. Dec 30.
Liverpool

BENNETT, ELIZABETH, Priory House, Dudley.
Co, Dad ey

Bellringer and Cunliffe,

Jan 13. Coldicott and

BLAKE, GARSON, Great Yarmouth, Merchant. Jan 1.
Yarmouth

BOYD, CORDELIA ANNA MARIA, Sussex gardens, Hyde
Domville and Co, New sq. Lincoln's-inn
BRADY, PATRICK, Barrow-on-Soar, Leicester, Gent.
and Co, Leicester

BURGOYNE, THOMAS, Stratford pl, and Oxford st, Esq. gaynes and Co, Oxford st

CHALMERS, JOHN FRANCIS, Ham, Surrey, Esq. Jan 15.
Barnes, Jermyn s

CHARLTON, MARK, Priory House, Dudley. Jan 13.
Dudley

COOPER, Rev. HENRY, Nunnington, York, Clerk.
York

Palmer, Great

Park. Feb 1.

Jan 1. Stone

Jau 8. BurBurrows and

Coldicott and Co,

Jan 9. Ware,

DIPNALL, SIDNET SMITH, LEwisham High rd, Esq. Jan 14. Reyroux and Co, Cannon st

RASER, WILLIAM COBBETT MACLEOD, Gosport, Hants, Outfitter. Jan 1. Blake and Reed, Portsea

GILLMAN, ANDREW, Sherland pl, Twickenham, Law and Parliamentary Agent. Sherry, Chapel st, Bedford-row

HARRILL, YHOMAS, Weston-super-Mare, Gent. Dec 31. Chapman, Weston-super-Mare

HIRD, HARRY, Bradford, York, Merchant. Feb 1. Dubois, King st, Cheapside

HOWARD, JOSEPH, Culcheth, Lancaster, Farmer. Dec 31. Nicholson and Co, Warrington

HUISSGEN, MARIA AGATHA THERESE, Eastbourne, Sussex. Jan 1. Saxton and Morgan, Somerset st, Portm⚫n sq

HUTCHINSON, FRANCIS. Thirsk, York, Nursery Gardener. Jan 15.
West, Thirsk

ILLINGWORTH, WILLIAM, Halifax, Gent. Jan 7. Craven, Leeds
Moss, BET Y, The Groves, York. Dec 31. Dent, York

NELSON, HORATIO, Pendleton, Manchester, Beerhouse Keeper. Dec 22.
Potter and Lowe, Manchester

NEWPORT, WILLIAM GEORGE, Bristol, Hotel Keeper. Jan 3. Stone Dix, Bristol

OGLESBY SAMUEL, Llandudno, Carnarvon, Lithographer. Dec 31. Chamberlain, Llandudno

PHILIPPS, JOHN PHILIPPS ALLEN LLOYD, Dale Castle, Pembroke, Esq. Feb 1. Evans, Haverfordwest

PHILLIPS, WATT, St. Clears, Carmarthen, Innkeeper. Dec 31. Curtis, Neath

PRICE. HENRY NEWELL PRICE, Union Grove, Clapham, Gent. Feb 4. Nickinson, and Co, Chancery lane

RIMMER, ROBERT, Birkdale, Lancaster, Gent. Feb 25. Ramwell and Co, Bolton

ROBERTS, JOHN, Leeds, out of business. Jan 1. Hill, Halifax

ROGERS, HENRY, St Martin's ct, St Martin's lane, Miscellaneous Dealer. Dec 27. Ikin, Lincoln's-inn-fields

THOMPSON, JOHN, King st, West Hammersmith, out of business. Jan 26. Foster, Queen st pl

WALSH, THOMAS SELBY, Halifax, Card Maker. Jan 1. Wavell and Co, Halifax

WILLIAMS, CLEMENT, Rangoon, British Burmah, Surgeon. Jan 10. Williams, Laurence Pountney Hill

WILLIAMS, THOMAS, Wrexham, Wine and Spirit Merchant. Janl. Hughes, Wrexham

WILSON, THOMAS, Northwingfield, Derby, Yeoman. Dec 31. Jones and Middleton, Chesterfield

WOODWARD, GEORGE, Hartham rd, West Holloway, Wholesale Grocer. Dec 31. Carter and Bell, Eastcheap

WOODHAMS, JOHN, Littlehampton, Sussex, Corn Merchant. Jan 31. Stevens and Son, Brighton

County Courts.

WAKEFIELD.

[Gazette, Dec 2.]

(Before Mr. SERJEANT TINDAL ATKINSON, Judge.)
Nov. 6.-Foster v. Bentley and others.
Master and Servant-Agreement-Mutuality.

His HONOUR, in giving judgment, said that the defendants, who are entensive brewers and wine merchants at Oulton and Leeds, were desirous in the early part of 1878 to supply military officers' messes and regimental canteens with ales and spirits, and with this view advertised for a suitable traveller. The plaintiff, who had formerly held a commission in the army, but had retired from the service, replied to the advertisement, and on the 25th of May the defendants wrote to the plaintiff offering a salary of £150 a year to commence with. To this on the 31st the plaintiff replied asking whether the engagement was to be for any fixed time. He asked this because he would have to give up his house and remove his family to a long distance, and were the engagement to be for only a few months, it would be hardly worth his while to take it. On the 3rd of June the defendants wrote, "We propose that you should come to us for twelve months certain, and for a continuous engagement if your labours meet with any success." On the following day the plaintiff wrote to the defendants saying, "I beg to say I am quite satisfied with the proposals you make." On the 26th of June the defendants wrote, "When will you be able to come down here?" On the 16th of September the plaintiff replied, apologising for the delay and stating that he trusted to make up for lost time by increased exertions and diligence. In answer to this the defendant H. Bentley replied, "I certainly thought, not hearing from you, that you had given up all idea of coming to us, and I am glad to hear this is not the case. I expect to be at home on Monday or Tuesday when I shall be glad to see you and make arrangements for your commencing work for us." An interview took place between the plaintiff and Mr. Bentley on the 25th of September, when it was arranged that the plaintiff should at once commence travelling for the defendants. The plaintiff entered upon his duties, and matters went on until the month of February, 1879, when the defendants made some complaints of the amount of travelling expenses charged by the plaintiff. Some correspondence on this subject took