Page images

against the estate of the acceptors for the amount of the 1 ADJUDICATION OF BANKRUPTCY-JURISDICTION-PRIOR dividends which the estate of the brokers bad paid to the ADJUDICATION BY IRISH COURT,- In a case of Ex parte bankers in respect of the bills. It was admitted that, if the M'Culloch, before the Court of Appeal on the 17th inst., a brokers bad indorsed the bills to the bankers, the claim question arose whether an adjudication of bankruptcy ought could not bave been resisted. But it was contended that, to be made against a debtor who had already been adjudicated though by the law merobant the bolder for value of a a bankrupt in the Court of Bankruptcy in Ireland. The debtor bill of exchange most be taken to have an implied authority traded in Ireland and also at Liverpool, and had creditors and from the acceptor to indorse it over, and thus to become

assets in both places. He also had oreditors in Scotland. On a surety at the implied request of the acceptor for the the 19th of April he presented a petition to the Irish court, due payment of the bill by him, yet a guarantee given by asking for protection of his property and person from process tbe holder, without the knowledge of the acceptor, could until further order, and that such proposal as he might not be taken to have been given by bis implied anthority make to his creditors, and wbich should be agreed to by or at bis implied request, but the giver of it, thoogb paying them, might be executed under the direction of the court. a part of the amount of the bill on the compulsion of bis

A protection order was made the same day until the 18th of goarantee, must be taken as against the acceptor to bave

May, and a meeting of the creditors was sum.Doned for the made a mere voluntary payment, for which he could not

3rd of May. The meeting was held on that day, and a proprove against the acceptor's estate. The Court of Appeal

posal made by the debtor was rejected by the creditors. "No (JAMES, COTTON, and THESIGER, L.JJ.) refused to accede

further proceeding was taken under this petition. On the 24th to this argument, and held that the proof ought to be ad

of April an English creditor issued a debtor's summons mitted." JAMES, L.J., said that it would be contrary to

against the debtor out of the Liverpool County Court and ordinary notions of jostice if the proof was pot admitted.

served it on him. On this summops an act of bankruptoy The acceptors were liable for a sum of money part of

was committed on the 1st of May, and on the 3rd of May the wbiob bad been paid by otber persone. Tbe bills were

summoning creditor presented a bankruptcy petition in the manufactured for the purpose of raising money for the

county court, founded on the act of bankruptcy committed joint benefit of the drawers and acceptors, and were pot

on the debtor's summons. The 13th of May was fixed for out into tbe world as negotiable instruments. So far as

the hearing of the petition, and a receiver was appointed. the brokers were concerned, it did not signify which of the

On the 4th of May an adjudication of bankruptcy was made two firms were drawers and which acceptors. The

against the debtor in the Irish court on a petition presented transaction was in substance the same as if both drawers

by himself on that day. A man sent by the English, receiver

took possession of the debtor's property in Ireland on the 4th and acceptors bad gone together to the bankers and asked tbem to diecount the bille. It must have been perfectly

of May, but was turned out of possession by a receiver

appointed by the Irish court. When the English petition well known to both that the brokers could discount the

came on for hearing, the judge of the county court bills only by means of advances made to them by their bankers; that they would re-discount the bills and

refused to make an adjudication, on the ground that

an adjudication had been already made would bave to make themselves liable to the badkers.

in Ireland.

Bacon, C.J., reversed this decision, holding that the The well-established practice of bill brokers not to in

petitioning creditor was entitled to an adjudication ex dorse the bills wbiob they re-discounted with tbeir bankere,

debito justitia. Before the Court of Appeal it was urged but to give the bankers a general guarantee that they

that the Irish adjudication could not relate back, whereas would be liable upon the bills to the bankers as if they

the English adjudication might relate back to an earlier hød indorsed them, must have been well known to the

act of bankruptcy than the default on the debtor's gentlemen who manufactured these bills. So far as bis

summons, and would thus be more for the benefit of the lordship was aware, there was no anthority, and he could

creditors generally. And reliance was placed on the fact see po principle, for bolding that tbe liability created by

that the debtor himself was the appellant, and that no such a guarantee differed from that which was oreated by

creditor was complaining. The court (JAMES, COTTON, the indorsement of a bill. No special authority was ever and THESIGER, L.JJ.) afirmed the decision of Bacon, OJ. given by tbe acceptor of a bill to the holder to indoree it.

| JAMES, L.J., thought that the English adjudication onght to His lordshjp was of opinion that by the making of a

stand for what it was worth. The only person who was negotiable instrument, & sufficient authority was

contesting it was the debtor. It was quite clear that he was given to the brokers to render themselves liable

witbin the very words of the Act; he had committed an act in respect of the bills, and that they paid the of bankruptcy, and the petitioning creditor bad applied for an amount which they had paid to the bankers as much adjudication in the proper way, and to the proper tribunal. under compulsion as if they bad indorsea the bills in the Without saying that in every case an adjudication was es ordinary way. Indeed, it might be called a mere accident debito justitiæ-for, as the Chief Judge had pointed out, the that the brokers did not, by the guarantee, confer on the Court of Bankruptcy still retained its old jurisdiction to bankers a formal authority to indorse their names on the decline to make an adjudication when it saw that it was being bills. If they had done so there would have been no dispute used inequitably, or to annul it when it had been made-yet about the right to prove. COTTON, L.J., said that no doubt if the court refused to make the adjudication in the present the payment of a bill of exchange under a compulsion, under

case, it would be prejudging the question what was the best taken without the express or implied request of the person course to take in the interest of the creditors-whether the primarily liable, would not give a right to prove against

ould not give a right to prove against | English or the Irish adjudication should go on. The Irish that person's estate. But why was it that the indorser of a court could be trusted to decide wbich was the proper course. bill of excbange was under a compulsion, authorized by

COTTON, L.J., said that there might be difficulties in working tbe acceptor, to pay it ? Because the acceptor impliedly

out the order, but the question was whether the court ought autborized any holder to indorse the bills, and to transfer

to cut the matter short at once. THESIGER, L.J., said that the his rights against the acceptor. In the present case the

proceedings in Ireland were obviously taken by the debtor for drawers of the bills must be taken to have been acting

the purpose of defeating the English bankruptcy, and it was on bebalf of the acceptors as well as of themselves, and reasonable, as regarded both the petitioning creditor and the to bave been authorized by the acceptors to deal with the

creditors generally, that the adjudication should be made in bills in the ordinary way of business, for the purpose of

| England. The petitioning creditor had taken all the proper getting them discounted. They acted within that authority steps regularly to obtain the adjudication, and under it in going to the brokers to get the bills discounted, and that

| transactions might be overreached wbich could not under the conferred on the brokers an authority to deal with the bills

Irish adjudication, - SOLICITORS, J. Hands; Singleton & according to the ordinary course of business in the city of

Tattershall. London, and consequently to guarantee the payment of the bills to the bankers. The payment, therefore, was made under & compulsion, which was undertaken under the PRACTICE – ACCIDENTAL SLIP IN ORDER - MODE OF implied authority of the acceptors, and the brokers were ALTERATION.-In a case of Hayes v. Booth, before the entitled to prove against the estate of the acceptors for what Master of the Rolls on the 18th inst., a motion was made they had paid. THESIGER, L.J., was also of opinion that an for the alteration of an order by inserting the word "freeoriginal authority from the acceptors to the brokers to give hold and" before the word “ leasehold," they having been the guarantee was to be implied from the circumstances. - omitted by an accidental slip from the order as drawn up: SOLICITORS, Lawrance, Plews, f Baker; Travers, Smith, A question was raised as to whether a fresh order need $ Braithwaite.

be drawn up to enable the original order to be altered.

JESSEL, M.R., said that the practice was to alter the Costs-HIGHER SCALE-RULES AS TO Cost8-ORD. 6, R. order on the production of counsel's brief only, and that 3.-In a case of Worms v. De Valdor, before Fry, J., on the no fresh order was required to amend the original order. 17th inst., the question arose as to the scale on which -SOLICITORS, Peacock & Goddard.

costs were to be given. The action was brought for the purpose of obtaining the delivery ap for cagoellation, on

the ground of fraud, of certain bills of exchange accepted PRACTICE-TRIAL BY JURY-INFRINGEMENT OF PATENT by the plaintiff, or for the cancellation of the plaintiff's -SUFFICIENCY OF SPECIFICATION-COMPLICATED ISSUES— acceptance of the same. The plaintiff also asked for TRIAL BEFORE JUDGE-RULES OF Court, 1875, ORD. 36, damages for the wrongful detention of the bills, and an R. 26.-In a case of Downes v. Hughes of Company (Limited), injunction, until the delivery up or cancellation, to restrain before the Master of the Rolls on the 18th inst., a the defendants from negotiating, parting with, or in any motion was made by the defendant that, notwithstanding way dealing with the bills, with farther relief. The action the notice of trial before a jury given by the plaintiff, the was tried before Fry, J., on January 28. He gave judgment action might be tried before the judge withont a jury under for the plaintiff, with costs (28 W. R. 346), but no mention ord. 36, r. 26. The action was one for infringement of a was made in the order of the scale on which the costs were complicated patent for a combination, and the issues

to be given. The plaintiff pow moved for a direction to raised were want of novelty, the insufficiency of the speci- the taxing master to tax and allow the costs to the plaintiff fication and the infringement. JESSEL, S.R., said that on the bigber scale. Fry, J., said that he thought ho this was an action which as an ordinary rule would be might accede to the application, and direct that the costs tried before a judge of the Chancery Division withoat a should be given on the higher scale. The case was one of jury, but the plaintiff had, notwithstanding that he had great perplexity, and one in wbioh it was it that the bigher marked it for bis court, chosen to give notice of trial before scale should be applied. As a general role he should be a jory. The defendant said this was not a proper case for unwilling to direct the higher scale to be applied on an a trial before ajory, and he relied on several grounds. The first application made subsequent to the bearing, since the facts was that the question of novelty, involving, as it did, tle of the case wonld, in all probability, have to be re-disconsideration of various previous patents, was not a fit one for a jury.

cussed at a great expense of pablic time. The facts of the As a general rule jaries were not able to present case, however, were within bis lordship's recollec-. understand these questions properly, and in effect there tas no face in dispate, and the whole question was one of tion, and he thought that onder the roles as to costs (ord applied mechanics. In his opinion that issue was not a

6, r. 3), he had power to make the order now asked, subseproper one for a jury. The second issue was also an

quent to the hearing, and he accordingly directed the costs extremely difficult one as to the sufficiency of the sprcifi- hams de Co.

to be taxed on the higher scale.-SOLICITORS, M. Abracation, and it was one wbich he did not consider a jury would te competent to deal with. Then the other issue as to infringement was also most complicated and difficolt, having regard to the character of the two machines. This no doubt was in a sense an issue of fact, but it really would Law Students' Journal. almost entirely depend on expert evidence, and was not an issue which a jury could satisfactorily deal with. In his opinion the action was one that ought clearly to be dealt

LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY. with by a ju dge of the Chancery Division, and be ought not The weekly meeting of this society was held at the Law to be afraid to say so. There was, moreover, this remark to Institution, Chancery-lane, on Tuesday evening last, Mr. be made as to a trial at the assizes, there might not be A, M. Ellis in the chair. The followiog was the question sufficient time to try the case and it might be made a appointed for discussion : “ A testator bequeaths his residuremanet, or the judge might not think it a case fit for a ary estate upon trust for all his children who shall attain jury and might send it for trial to an official referee. the age of twenty-one years, but directs that none of them Anything more unsatisfactory than either of the last events shall be entitled to recrive their shares until the youngest happening he could not conceive, and in mercy to the parties for the time being shall have attained the age of twenty-one he thought the present order would be the best. The costs years. Testator has a number of children, and one of them would be costs in the action.-SOLICITORS, Doyle & Sons ; having attained the age of twenty-one years dies during the J. Henry Johnson.

minority of the youngest child. Are the representatives of

the deceased child entitled to his share ?Mr. Percy B. WILL-HOTCHPOT CLAUSE-EXTENT OF APPLICATION

Gregson opened the discussion in the affirmative; Mr.

Christopher Child supported the negative. Messrs. J. W. -INTENTION OF TESTATOR.-In a case of Stewart v.

Evans, B.Sc., F. J. Green, and E. G. Spiers sapported the Stewart, before the Master of the Rolls, on the 21st of June, a question was raised on further consideration decided in the affirmative by a large majority.

affirmative. The question on being put to the meeting was as to the extent of the application of a hotch pot clause in a will. By the will the testator had given certain property to his six children, and had directed

UNITED LAW STUDENTS SOCIETY. them to bring into hotchpot any advances made to them. By a codicil the testator revoked the gift to one of his On Monday, the 14th inst., a meeting of the above-named children, and, accordingly, one-sixth of the property society was held at the Law Institution, Mr. D’A. B. Collwas undisposed of, and passed to his next of kin yer in the chair, to discuss the following moot :-“ A. by h.l., his widow and the other five children. The ques a letter posted on the 3rd of October, enters into a tion argued was whether any advances were to be contract with B. The letter reaches B. on the 11th of brought into hotchpot as to the undisposed-of share as October, who immediately posts bis acceptance to A. Meanagainst the widow or only as against the other children. wbile, on the 8th of October, A. posts a letter to B: revokJESSEL, M.R., said that the object of the will was that ing the contract. Can A. revoke the contract ?”

Mr. the children should share equally inter se. The testator | Owen opened the discussion in the affirmative, and Messrs. had subsequently revoked the gift of one share, the Acland, Mott-White house, Kains-Jackson, Shera, and effect being that that share went to his next of kin, and that several other members opposed the opener. Mr. Pickersgill his wife was interested in it, as well as his other children. gave & qualified support to Mr. Owen, who replied The question was whether the testator intended the hotch. late in the evening, and, after the chairman had summed pot clause to apply further than as among children. In up, the moot was decided in the negative by a large his opinion, according to the will, the testator only in majority. tended the clause to apply as amongst his children, and On Wednesday, the 16th_inst., the society met at according to the general law, following Meinertzagen v. Clement's.inn Hall, Mr. B. T. Bartram in the chair. The Walters, L. R. 7 Ch. 870, under the Statutes of Distriba motion on the paper, "That this society views with satisfactions, the whole doctrine of advances only applied to

tion the non-renewal of the Pence Preservation Act,” was children.

The children therefore need not bring any opened by Mr. N.F. Synott. The motion was supported advances into hotchpot as against the widow.–SOLICITORS, by Messrs. Morice, Kittle, Pickersyill

, and Maclaren, and it Van Sandau & Cumming ; Nash & Field: Philip Roberts ; was opposed by Messrs. Kains-Jackson, Owen, Mott. Crowder, Anstie, & Vizard.

Whitehouse, and Phillips. Shortly before ten o'clock, Mr.


Appointments, Etc.

N. F. Synott replied, and, after the chairman had put Mr. WILLIAM THORNBURN, solicitor, of Carlisle, has been the motion to the society in the usual manner, it was appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the found that the votes for and against the motion were equal. Supreme Court of Judicature. Thc chairman tben gave his casting vote against the motion, which was accordingly lost.

A meeting of this society was held on the evening of Wednesday, the 23rd inst., at Clercent's-inn Hall, Mr. B. T. Bartrum in the chair. The motion on the pa par was, That the rights of landowners with respect to the preservation of game require curtailment." Mr. A. H.

Spokes opened the debate, and was sapported by Messrs.
Renner-Maxwell, Kittle, and Maclaren, and opposed by

Messrs. Acland and Bateman-Napier. Mr. Spokes then

LIMITED IN CHANCERY. replied, and upon a division the motion was carried by a | CHARLES DENHAM AND COMPANY, LIMITED.--Petition for winding

up presented June 15, directed to be heard before the M.R., on majority of five.

June 26. Emmet and Son, Bloomsbury sg, agents for Wavell and The annual dinner of the society will take place at Co, Halifax, solicitors for the petitioners

FLAGSTAFF SILVER MIXING COMPANY OF UTAH, LIMITED.-Peti. Anderton's Hotel, Fleet-street, on Wednesday, the 30th

tion for winding up presented June 15, directed to be heard before inst., at seven p.m., Mr. Montague Cookson, Q.O., in the

the M.R., on June 26. Eley, New Broad st, solicitor for the peti. chair. Members intending to be present are requested to


FLAGSTAFF SILVER MINING COMPANY OF UTAI,'LIMITED.-Petition communicate with Mr. R. B. D. Acland, 13, Vincent

for winding up presented June 16, directed to be heard before the square, S. W., and to come in morning dress.

M.R. on June 26. Hillearys and Taylor, Fenchurch bldge, soli. citors for the petitioner MERCANTILE AND EXCHANGE CLUB, LIMITED. --The M.R. has, by

an order dated May 27, appointed Charles Minshull, Fenchurch st,


CIATION, LIMITED. - V.C. Malins has, by an order dated April 29, appointed John Stockdale Stallard, 1, Gresham bldgs, Basinghali st, to be official liquidator. Creditors are required, on or before

July 15, to send their names and addresses and the particulars of Mr. Joseph BROWN, Q.C., has been appointed a Com. | their debts or claims to the above. Thursday, July 29 at 12, is apmissioner of Assize for the Oxford Circuit. Mr. |

pointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims

RIPLEY OLD BREWERY COMPANY, LIMITED.-1.0. Hall has fixed Brown practised for several years as a special pleader, and

June 28 at 12 at his chambers as the time and place for the appointwas called to the bar at the Middle Temple in Michaelmas ment of an official liquidator Term, 1845. He became a Queen's Counsel in 1865, and SHIPOWNERS' AND MARINERS' INSURANCE COMPANY, LIMITED.

Petition for winding up presented June 10, directed to be hean he is a member of the South-Eastern Circuit. He is a

before the M.R. on June 26. De Fivas, Devonshire st, Portland pl, boncher of Lincolns'-inu, and chairman of the Incorporated i solicitor for the petitioner Council of Law Reporting.

[Gazette, June 18.] Mr. FREDERICK THEOBALD LANGLEY, solicitor (of the

CIVIL SERVICE AND GENERAL BREAD AND FLOUR SUPPLY Assofirm of Corser, Fowler, & Langley), of Wolverhampton, has

CIATION, LIMITED. - V.C. Hall has fixed July 1 at l, at his been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the chambers, as the time and place for the appointment of an official Supreme Court of Judicature.


CIVIL SERVICE MEAT SUPPLY AssOCIATION, LIMITED.--By an order Mr. CHARLES ROBERT LYNE, solicitor, of Newport, Mon made by V.0. Bacon dated June 12, it was ordered the abovo mouthshire, has been appointed by Lady Llanover to be association be wound up. Vanderpump, Gray's inn sq, solicitors

for the peti-tioner Steward of the Manor of Abercarne, in succession to Mr. |

GREAT EASTERN GLACIARIUY COMPANY, LIMITED.--By an order Thomas Morgan Llewellin, resigned, Mr. Lyne was for

made by the M.R. dated June 12, it was ordered that the above several years deputy town clerk of the borougli of Newport. company be wound up. Duncan and Co, Bloomsbury są, solicitors He was admitted a solicitor in 1871, and he is also steward

for the petitioners

OLDBURY BRICK COMPANY, LIMITED. -- Petition for winding up of the manor of Rogerstone, and clerk to the Usk and

presented June 21, directed to be heard before the M.R. on July 3. Ebbw Fishery Board, and to the Mynyddislwyn School Newman and Co, Cornhill, solicitors for the petitioners Board.

SLATE COMPANY, LIMITED.-Creditors are required, on or before

July 16, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of Mr. JOSEPH JOHNSON LEEMAN, M.P., solicitor, of York, their debts or claims to Alfred Audrey Broad, Walbrook, Friday, has been appointed a Deputy-Lieutenant for the West Riding

July 30 at 11 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the

debts and claims of Yorkshire. Mr. Leeman is the son of Mr. George Lee

TRADERS' BANKING AND SUPPLY COMPANY, LIMITED.--V.C. Hall man, clerk of the peace for the East Riding, and late M.P. has, by an order dated May 14, appointed Harry Seymour Foster, for York, and he was born in 1842. He was admitted a Copthall bldgs, to be official liquidator

TRAVELLERS' ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an solicitor in 1865, and is in partnership with his father and

order made by the M.R. dated June 12, it was ordered that the Mr. Joseph Wilkinson. He was elected M.P. for the city company be wound up. Hanbury and Co, New Broad st, solicitors of York in the Liberal interest in March last.

for the petitioner

[Gazette, June 22.] Mr. ROBERT PAYNE, solicitor, of Frome, has been appointed Steward of the Manor of Frome, in succession to Mr. Malim

UNLIMITED IN CHANCERY. Messiter, deceased. Mr. Payne was admitted a solicitor in | NORTH AND SOUTI WILTSHIRE JUxCTION RAILWAY COMPAXT.1859, and is in partnership with Mr. William Dunn, clerk

Petition for winding up presented June 17, directed to be heard

before V.C. Malins, on July 2. Parson, Strand, solicitor for the of the peace and clerk to lieutenancy for Somersetshire.



By an order made by the M.R. dated June 12, it was ordered that ham, of 39, King-street, Cheapside, London, E.C., has the above company be wound up.---Ballard, Clifford's inn, solicitor been appointed a Commissioner of the High Court of Ju

for the petitioner dicature at Fort William, in Bengal, to take the acknow

[Gazette, June 22.] ledgments of married women in respect of property in India, and also to take affidavits or affirmatious in

COUNTY PALATINE OF LANCASTER. all suits, matters, and proceedings depending in that


LIMITED.-Creditors are required, on or before July 10, to send court.

their names and addresses and the particulars of their debts or

claims to Thomas Dewhurst, Theatre bldgs, Fishergate, Preston Mr. LEOFRIC TEMPLE, Q.O., who has been appointed

[Gazette, June 22.] Recorder of the City of Carlisle, on the resignation of the Solicitor-General, is the son of the late Mr. Christopher

Temple, Q.C., judge of county courts, and chancellor of the
County Palatine of Durham. He was called to the bar at


Bayle. June 15 Lincoln's-inn in Easter Term, 1843, and is a member of GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY WEST MIDLAND PROVIDENT Associithe Northern Circuit. He was for several years a revising TION FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Great Western Railway Company's barrister, and became a Queen's Counsel' in 1872. Mr. Office, Worcester Temple is a bencher of Lincoln's-inn, and deputy recorder of

HALES FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Carpenters' Arms Inn, Hales, Norfolk,

June 18 Liverpool.

[Gazette, June 22.]


Solicitors' Cases. On Tuesday a conference of solicitors and representatives of various building societies throughout the country wag held at the Westminster Palace Hotel, the subjects for

COMMON PLEAS DIVISION. consideration including the forfeiture clauses of leases and

(Before Lord COLERIDGE, C.J., and Grove, J.) the registration of land. The conference also had before June 23.- In the Matter of W. R. Philp, a Solicitor. it the proposals contained in the Bills in regard to con This was a matter in which, upon complaint made against veyancing and solicitors' remuneration. Mr. Torrens,

the respondent, a master of the court bad been directed to M.P., presided, and there were also present Mr. Hopwood,

hold an inquiry and make a report to the court. The charge M.P., Q.C., Mr. F. W. Buxton, M.P., Mr. Bigbam, Mr. against Mr. Philp was that he had misappropriated a cheque Addison, and a number of gentlemen connected with pro for £50, which he had received from one of his clients. The vincial building societies.

cheque was made payable to order and was indorsed “ W. The CHAIRMAN, referring to the proposals in Mr. Philp," and the explanation given by him before the master Wartoa's Bill now before Parliament, said that the right. was that he was ill at the time, that his clerk had the minded members of the Honge of Commons approved the management of the office, and that he did not believe the principle embodied in that measure. Its object was to indorsement was his, as he was in the habit of signing his enable courts of law to give relief from the operation of name “ William Philp.” The master reported that the case forfeiture clauses in leages under which, at times, powers was one of grave suspicion. were exercised destructive of the leaseholders' interests. Murray appeared for the Law Society, and Fryer for the He could not see why the courts should not have this client who had drawn the cheque. On behalf of Mr. Philp power, which would, no doubt, ease the relations between no cause was shown. the leaseholder and the landowner. He was favourably Lord COLERIDGE, after observing that Mr. Philp or his inclined towards Mr. Warton's Bill, which he believed was clerk must certainly have received the proceeds of the cheque, calculated to meet the difficulties which now existed. pointed out that the latter had never been called before the

Mr. ADDISON (of the firm of Linklater, Hackwood, Ad master, nor had Mr. Philp taken any steps to prosecute him. dison, & Brown) moved the following resolution :-“That Mr. Philp himself had not sworn positively that he never had it is desirable to give power to the High Court of Justice the money, nor had he sworn that the endorsement was not to restrain the enforcement of provisoes of forfeiture in bis writing. He came to the conclusion, therefore, tbat which are contained in leases, and that the Bill introduced Mr. Philp was not a fit person to remain on the rolls of the by Mr. Warton should pass into law during the present court. The rule, therefore, would be made absolute that he session, and should not be delayed during the period be struck off, which must be required for the consideration of any GROVE, J., concurred. comprehensive measure dealing with the laws of property." Mr. J. H. MASON seconded the motion.

A discussion ensued regarding cases of hardship which had arisen through courts of equity refusing to restrain Legislation of the TU eek. forfeiture of leases under clauses which had been regarded as merely formal. Mr. Stevens urged that the Bill should be referred to a Select Committee, in order that these

HOUSE OF LORD3. cases of hardship might be made more generally known.

JUNE 17.-BILL READ A SECOND TIME. The chairman said that such a course would destroy all PRIVATE BILL.—Liverpool Corporation. . chance of passing the Bill this session. A gentleman who

BILLS READ A THIRD TIME. described himself as the representative of Liverpool brewers said his clients thought that the measure would

PRIVATE BILLS.-Neath Harbour Commissioners, Mersey interfere with their publichouse properties, which were held

Railway, London and North-Western Railway (Sutton by tenants under forfeiture leases. When the tenants, by

Coldfield and Lichfield Railway), Ely and Bury St. Ed. their manner of conducting the houses, brought the

munds (Light) Railway Amendment, Prescot Gas. licences into jeopardy, the brewers would not be able

Settled Land, Conveyancing and Law of Property. to eject them in a summary manner so as to save the leases.

JUNE 18.-BILL READ A SECOND TIME. He suggested that the Bill should be amended to meet these PRIVATE BILL.-Helston Railway. cases.

BILL READ A THIRD TIME. Mr. HIGHAM said the Bill would be considered by a committee of gentlemen, and might be amended to meet such

PRIVATE BILL.–Worcester and Aberystwith Junction cases. After some further conversation, the resolution was

Railway. carried unanimously.

JUNE 21.-BILLS READ A SECOND TIME. Mr. LEAROYD (L-aroyd & Learovd, solicitors) moved, on PRIVATE BILLS.-Loose Valley Railway, Sutton Bridge the subject of land registration, “That this meeting cordially Dock. concurs in the recommendation of the committee of last session

BILLS READ A THIRD TIME. on land titles and transfer in favour of the establishment PRIVATE Bills.-Lonsdale Settled Estates, South London of registries of assurances' throughout England and Wales ; | Tramways (Extensions), Chipping Wycombe Borough Exand, having regard to the special and urgent necessity that tension. exists for giving immediate effect to this recommendation,

JUNE 22.-BILLS READ A THIRD TIME. without waiting for more comprehensive legislation on the

PRIVATE BILLS.-British Gaslight Company (Limited) subject, expresses its earnest approval of the Bill now before Parliament to improve the constitution, and extend the dis.

(Staffordshire Potteries), Pegwell Bay Reclamation and trict of the Middlesex Land Register, and hopes that the

Sandwich Haven Improvement, Liverpool and Birkenhead Bill may become law during the present session.” The mover

Subway, Denton and Houghton Gas. reminded the meeting that the Dimsdale and other great land frauds had been committed with ease through the absence of any compulsory registration of transactions in land.

HOUSE OF COMMONS. Mr. GREEN seconded the motion. In reply to questions, JUNE 17.-BILLS READ A THIRD TIME. Mr. Learoyd said that the cost of registration, it was thought, PRIVATE BILLS.-London, Brighton, and South Coast should be covered by half a guinea. The resolution was Railway, London, Tilbury, and Southend Railway, Northcarried. Lord Cairps' Conveyancing Bill and the Solicitors' ampton Tramways, Local Government Highways ProRemuneration Bill were also discussed, but no resolutions visional Orders (Salop). were presented with regard to theni.

Bill to Amend the Commoa Law Prooedure Act and the
Judicature Act (Mr. Mellor).

Savings Banks.


| HOBBS, THOMAS JOIN CROOME, Frenchay, Gloucester, Iron PRIVATE Bills.-Lancaster Corporation, Llanelly and

Manufacturer. July 15. Hobbs v Pike, v.C. Hall. Harwood,

Mynydd Mawr Railway, Mersey Dooka and Harbour Board, | HODSON. EMMA MARIA

HODSON, EMMA MARIA, Sheffield. July 21. M.R. Shackles and Stapenhill Bridge, Wednesfield and Wyrley Bank Railway Son, Kingston-upon-Hull (Abandopment), Drainage and Improvement of Lands Pro.

JOHNS, HENRY WILLIAM, Warwick gardens, Kensington, Builder,

July 15. Johns v Johns, V.C. Malins. Moon, Lincoln's inn fields visional Order (No. 2), Gas and Water Orders Confirma.

LIVETT, WILLIAM CHATTERIS, Whittlesey, Cambridge, Farmer. July tion, Local Government Provisional Orders (Abingdon, 15. Livett v Watson, V.C. Malins. Peed, Whittlesey &o.).

NICHOLS, HANNAH, Chelsford, Cheshire. July 14. Morton v Hunt,

M.R. May, Macclesfield JUNE 21.-BILLS READ A SECOND TIME. PERKINS, CHRISTOPHER, Twyford, Bucks, Gent. July 15. Perkins PRIVATE BILLS. -Aberdare Markets and Town Hall,

v Bridgwater, V.C. Malins. Hughes, Budge row

SWEETING, GEORGE, Cheltenham, Gent. July 18. Sweeting Black Sluice Drainage, Hunt's Patent, Rother Levels Sweeting, V.0. Malins. Sweeting, Southampton st, Holborn (Improvement of Drainage Rye Harbour), Shrewebury

(Gazeite, June 18.] (Kingsland) Bridge, Witham River Oatiall Improvements. BILLS READ A THIRD TIME.

CREDITORS UNDER 22 d 23 VICT. CAP. 25. PRIVATE BILLS.-Lincolo Gas, Swangea Harbour, Wrex. ham Water,


ADKINS, ESTHER, Stratford-upon-Avon, Warwick. July 20. Slatter

and Co, Stratford-upon-Avon Wild Birds Protection.

ARNOT, JAMES, Gt Woodcote, Surrey, Farmer. July 3. Ashwin,

Garden ct, Temple

BOON, JAMES, Priory grove, South Lambeth, Dairyman. July 19. Bill to Amend the Laws relating to Game and Trespass Saffery and Huntley, Tooley st, London Bridge on Land (Sir H. Selwin-Ibbetson).

BRUNNER, IGNATIUS, Birmingham, Gent. July 31. Rooke, Bir.


Buck, LAURA JANE, Clifton, Bristol, July 10. Knocker, Dover

CANNON, AUGUSTA, Romford, Essex. Aug 11. Scott, Cannon st Consolidated Fard (No. 1).

DODD, MICHAEL, Carlisle, Honorary Major in the Northumberland JUNE 23.-BILLS READ A SECOND TIME.

Militia. Aug 14. Hough, Carlisle

DYKE, JOHN, Highgrove, Reading, Gent. July 22, Lydall, SouthPRIVATE BILL.-Bienheim Settled Estates,

ampton buildings, Chancery lane Bankruptcy Act Amendment, Merohant Shipping Act EDMANDS, CHARLES HENRY, Portsdown rd, Maida vale, Solicitor.

July 10. Smith and Co, Abchurch lane (1854) Amendment.

Fox, ARTHUR, Blackheath, Kent, Merchant. July 10. Smith and BILL IN COMMITTEE.

Co, Abchurch lane Consolidated Fund (No. 1).

Garg, RICHARD, Trowbridge, Wilts, Gent. June 30. Taylor, Trow

bridge GILDER, FREDERIC WILKIE, Effingham, Surrey, Esq. Aug 9. Dom.

ville and Co, News, Lincoln's inn
HARDMAN, MARY, Edward st, Manchester. July 21. Diggles and

Ogden, Manchester
Creditors' Claims.

HARRIS, WILLIAM AUGUSTUS, Elm ct, Temple, Barrister-at-Law.

July 27.* Harris, Bovey Tracey
Howitt, RICHARD TIPPLE, Milton-next-Gravesend, Kent, Coach

Smith. July 10. Denton and Co, Gray's inn sq
CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. Johnson, WILLIAM, North Shields, Northumberland, Shipowner.

July 15. Lietch and Co, North Shields

LEWIS, THOMES FLOYDE, Newport, Monmou ent. CRAWSHAY. ROBERT THOMPSON, Cyfarthfa Castle, Merthyr Tydfil. Gibbs and Llewellyn, Newport

Esq. July 8. Crawshay v Crawshay, V.C. Hall. Lawrence, New Lucas, Thomas, Birmingham, Gent. July 12. Williams, Birmingsq, Lincoln's inn

ham CLARK, WILLIAM, Old Goole, York, Farmer. July 9. Clark v Foster, MACKAY, Thomas MILLER, Earl's ct sq, Kensington, Gent. July 15. M.R. Burland and Son, South Cave

Duncan, Liverpool
EAGLE, WILLIAM, Torriano avenue, Kentish town, Gent. July 12. NEAVE, BENJAMIN, Highbury Grange, Esq. July 10. Neave, Cheap-

Redman v Taylor, V.C. Bacon. Groom, Raymond buildings, side
Gray's inn

PEARSON, ANNIE, Renishaw, Derby. July 1. Binney and Co,
FILBEE, FRANCIS, Lewknor, Oxford, Farmer, July 6. Filbee v Sheffield
Filbee, M.R. Jones, Watlington

PEARSON, JOHN, Shaftesbury rd East, Commercial Clerk. July 12. KING, HENRY SAMUEL, Chigwell, Essex, Esq. June 30. Sewell v Collins and Wilkinson, King William st King, V.C. Hall. Plews, Old Jewry chambers

PEARSON, MARTIA, Godstone, Surrey. Aug 1. Drake and Co MOORE, WILLIAM, Sunderland, Durham, Solicitor. July 10. Moore PEARSON, ROBERT, Renishaw, Derby, Colliery Manager. Jaly I. v Moore, M.R. Longden, Sunderland

Binney and Co, Sheffield
MORPHINOS, Rev NARCISSUS, Sutherland pl, Bayswater. July 1. PHIPPS, SUSANNAH, Dover. July 10. Knocker, Dover

Freshfield v Perthessi, V.C. Hall. Freshfields and Williams, Bank PUSINELLI, SERAFINO, Leeds, Retired Jeweller. July 5. Dibb and buildings

Co, Leeds WILDIG, WILLIAM, Woore, Salop, Builder. July 9. Wildig v Wildig, QUILLIAM, SAMUEL, Liverpool, Watch Manufacturer. Aug 1. Smith M.R. 'Onions, Market Drayton

and Soo, Liverpool [Gazette, June 11.] RUEL, ISABELLA, Brick lane, Spitalfields, July 31. Cattlin, Warm

wood st BLACKALLER, JOIX, Pourton, Dorset, Farmer. July 15. Blackaller

SHEW, THOMAS, Chaceley, Gloucester, Gent, July 8. Salt and v Blackaller, V.C. Hall. Groves, Lincoln's inn fields

Parnell, Bristol

STEPHENS, ANN, Reading. July 24. Dryland, Reading
Foot. Oct 25. Forbes v Forbes, M.R. Cardale, Bedford row
HAMILTOX, WILLIAM, Grosvenor pl, Commercial rd. July 10.

STEWART, WILLIAM, Millbrook, Southampton, Esq. July 21. New.

man, Southampton Hamilton v Hamilton, V.C. Malins. Warburton, West st, Finsbury

STREATFEILD, KATIERINE ELIZABETH, Brompton crescent, South circus HUMPAGE, CHARLES, Moor Green Mills, Worcester, Metal Roller.

Kensington. July 20. Lambert and Co, John st, Bedford row July 7. Nield v Humpage, V.C. Hall. Blewitt, Birmingham

VALE, CATHERINE ELIZABETH, Montpelier terrace, Teddington.

July 26. Weall, Surrey st, Strand SMYTH, WILLIAM HENRY, Charles, Devon, Gent. July 9. Smyth

Wass, THOMAS WILLIAX, Osgodby, Lincoln, Farner, July 1. Smyth, M.R. Day, South Molton

Rhodes and Sons, Market Rasen STEVENSON, FREDERICK GOUDE, Moorgate st chambers, Wine Mer. chant. July 13. Hankin v Stevenson, V.C. Bacon. Routh,

Watson, WALTER CHRISTOPHER, Tenterden st, Hanover sq, Esq.

July 15. Barnard and Co, Lincoln's inn fields
Southampton st, Bloomsbury
STONE, JOUX, Ewell, Surrey, Brick Manufacturer. July 8. White

WHITE, ALEXANDER, Liverpool, Decorator. July 1. Rogerson and

Co, Liverpool v Keen, V.C. Bacon, Letts, jun, Bartlett's buildings

[Gazette, June 15.]

WHITLEY, JOHN, Wilderspool, Chester, Brewer. Aug 7. Whitley

and Co, Liverpool BAULEY, Ely, Billinghay, Lincoln, Farmer. July 16. Bailey v W188, THOMAS, Slough, Bucks. July 8. Long and Co, Windsor Bailey, M.R. Poole, Chancery lane

WREN, THOMAS, Stockton, Durham, Guano Merchant. Jaly 30. Bowra, WILLIAM ADDENBROKI, Surbiton, Surrey, Esq. Sept 30. Payne, John st, Bedford row Lapraik v Wood, V.C. Malins. Atkinson, Ferntower rd, High

(Gazete. June 11.] bury New Park

AINLEY, SAMUEL, Thorne, York, Gent. July 31. Rollett and Sons, CADOGAN, Sir GEORGE, Park pl, St. James's, K.C.B., General in Hull

H. M. Army. July 19. Cadogan v Cadogan, V.C. Hall. Bennett ALDER, SYDNEY, East Dulwich, Surrey, Staff Surgeon H.M. Army. and Co, New sq, Lincoln's inn

July 15. Matthews and Greetham, Bedford 10W CRAIG, SKENE, Woodburn, Torquay, Esq. July 31. Catling y ALLEY, EDMUND, Islip, Oxford, Gent. Aug 31. Walsh, Oxford Esson, V.C. Hall. Richardson, Charles st, St. James's so

BASSETT, ELIZABETI, Nottingham. Sept 1. Dowson and Wright, Cox, SAMUEL HENRY FORTNOM, Truro, Esq. July 15. Howse v Nottingham Archer, V.C. Hall, Edwards, Old Jewry

BATH, JOHN, Weston-super-Mare, Gent. July 20. Davies, WestonDEVEREUX, MARY ANN, Albion rd, Stoke Newington July 19. super-Mare Devereux v Harman, V.0. Hall. Davie, New inn, Strand

BENSON, EDMUND GEORGE, Queensland, Australia, Gent. Dec 31. FRENCI, Jorn, Newcastle pl, Clerkenwell, Working Jeweller, Thompson, Gray's inn sq

July 12 French v Austin, V.C. Malins. Voss, Vestry hall, BERRY, Ann, Brighton. July 26. Hemir 3, Banbury
Bethnal Green

BILLS, HANNAI, Oughtibridge, York, July 12, Taylor, Sheffield

« PreviousContinue »