decided on the 19th of April, 1880, by the Master of the Rolls. The case is reported in the Times newspaper of the 20th of April, 1880. The effect of his lordship's decision is that, where a contract has been entered into for the sale and purchase of property, the property being insured against loss or damage by fire, and between the date of the contract and the completion of the purchase the property is burnt or damaged, the vendor is entitled, not only to the purchase-money, but also to the money received from the insurance office. It would appear that an insurance effected by the purchaser would not secure him from loss, inasmuch as fire offices will not pay twice for the same loss, although they may have received two separate premiums. The suggestion I made at the Incorporated Law Society's meeting was, that contracts for sale and purchase should embrace, not only the property agreed to be sold and bought, but also any fire insurance policy affecting it, and moneys assured thereby and to be and become payable thereunder; and that in the event of loss or damage by fire before completion of the purchase, the insurance money should be received by the vendor, but that it should be paid to the purchaser on completion and on receipt by the vendor of the purchase-money; and that in the interim the vendor, the assured, should be a trustee of the policy and policy-moneys for the purchaser. The suggestion that a memorandum indorsed upon the policy by the vendor assigning his interest to the purchaser would meet the difficulty, does not appear to me to do so. After completion there can be no difficulty unless there is gross carelessness. The Master of the Rolls, it would appear from the report of the above case, has not apparently much sympathy with his lordship's judgment, but appears to have been fettered by decisions of Lord Eldon and ViceChancellor Kindersley. W. H. HERBERT. 6a, Vigo-street, Regent-street, W., Oct. 13. [Rayner v. Preston is reported 28 W. R. 808.-ED. S. J.] LOAN BY BUILDING SOCIETY ON SECURITY OF REVERSIONARY INTEREST IN FUNDED PROPERTY. [To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.] Sir,-At the recent provincial meeting of the Incorporated Law Society at Sheffield, upon the discussion that arose after the paper had been read by Mr. Cleaver, of Liverpool, upon the case of the Saffron Walden Building Society v. Rayner, I ventured to suggest that a building society has no right to invest money upon security of a reversionary interest in funded property, or, in other words, that it would be ultrà vires to do so. This question does not appear to have been raised upon the hearing of the ease, but possibly some of your readers who take an interest in building society law might consider the point, and thus the question might be ventilated in your columns. I am informed that it is not uncommon now for building societies to advance money upon such securities. G. R. DODd. 54, New Broad-street, E.C., Oct. 13. The date for proceeding with the Berwick-on-Tweed election petition has been altered from the 18th to the 19th inst. The trial will begin at ten o'clock on the latter day in the Town-hall, Berwick, before Hawkins, J. and Lopes, J. The Wallingford petition, which is fixed for the 22nd inst., will also be heard before the same judges. The part-heard Worcester (Borough) petition will be resumed there on the 26th inst., before Lush, J., and Manisty, J., who will also try the Evesham petition, the hearing of which is fixed to take place at Worcester on the 30th inst. Cases of the Week. on BILL OF SALE-INJUNCTION TO RESTRAIN SALE.-In Longden v. Sheffield Deposit Bank, before Field, J., sitting for the Vacation Judge on the 13th inst., the plaintiff moved for an injunction to restrain the defendant from selling or removing certain goods comprised in a bill of sale under the following circumstances:-On the 22nd of June the plaintiff borrowed £300 from the defendant, who was a moneylender of the name of Kirkwood, but who traded as the "Sheffield Deposit Bank," in consideration of a premium of £140. The repayment of the loan and premium by quarterly instalments of £55 each was secured by a bill of sale which provided that if the plaintiff made default in payment of any instalment, or failed to pay the rent of the premises where the goods were, on the days when the same respectively became due, the defendant might immediately enter and sell the goods, and that the whole £300, together with a premium of £140, should at once become due. It appeared that the plaintiff's rent was due on the 6th of August, but that it was usual to pay it at the landlord's rent-dinner in October; and a letter of the 13th of August from the defendant's manager to the plaintiff to the effect that the production of the last receipt for rent would be satisfactory was put in evidence. The first instalment under the bill of sale became due on the 22nd of September, and it was actually paid about two p.m. on the following day. The plaintiff having on the 21st of September written to the defendant informing him that a business engagement would render it impossible for him to call at the office of the "bank" a the 22nd, clerk of the defendant received the £55, giving a receipt "on account of bill of sale," and his lordship drew the inferences of fact that such payment was made by the plaintiff, and that he was led by the defendant to believe that it was accepted by him in respect of the instalment due the previous day. On the morning of the 23rd of September, however, the defendant had taken possession of the goods comprised in the bill of sale, and he now claimed to exercise his power of sale, on the ground that the plaintiff had made default in payment of the rent due on the 6th of August, and of the instalment due on the 22nd of September, and on the authority of Hill v. Kirkwood (28 W. R. 328), it was contended that the court should not interfere with the strict legal rights of the mortgagee. It was also contended that the payment of £55 was accepted generally on account of the £440, which, by the plaintiff's default, had become payable. FIELD, J., approved of the principle of Hill v. Kirkwood, but held that the present case was distinguishable. No doubt a man was bound by a contract he had deliberately entered into; and, however oppressive and abusive such documents and transactions as those now before the court might be, he was bound to refuse the plaintiff's motion, unless he could grant it consistently with the established principles of law and equity. It was one of those principles that a man who, by his conduct, represented to another that a given state of things should be continued, was bound by such representation. In the present case the letter of the 13th of August was a distinct representation that the defendant was satisfied as to the rent. With regard to the payment of the £55, it was observable that the plaintiff wrote on the 21st to the effect that he proposed to pay it on the 23rd. If the defendant had been dissatisfied with the plaintiff's proposal, he could easily have given him notice that if he did not pay on the 22nd it would be too late. No such step was taken, but the defendant on the 23rd kept himself in the background and put forward a junior clerk to receive the £55, craftily adding to the receipt the words" on account of bill of sale." Not a word was then said to the plaintiff about being too late, or about possession having been taken, but when he got home he found the bailiff in possession of his stock and furniture. The learned judge had no difficulty in holding that the defendant's conduct was such as to lead the plaintiff to believe that he had no intention of taking advantage either of the non-payment of rent or of the payment of the £55 being made a few hours later than it was actually due, and he should grant an injunction till the trial.-SOLICITORS, Le Riche & Sons ; H. A. Maude. MANDAMUS-ABOLITION OF TERMS-VACATION BUSINESS -In Reg. v. Wiltshire Justices before Coleridge, J., and Field, J., sitting as a divisional court, the justices and the Swindon Local Board showed cause against a rule nisi for a mandamus to take the recognizances of the trustees of the Rolleston Trust in order to enable them to appeal from a decision of the justices in petty sessions in favour of the local board. It appeared that the trustees gave notice of appeal on the day the justices gave their decision, and were informed that there would be no justices in Swindon on the following day, but that on the next day but one the same justices would be sitting again in petty sessions, and at the last-mentioned sitting they applied to the justices to take their recognizances. The justices, however, refused to do so, on the ground that the application had not been made "immediately," and it was was contended on the authority of Reg. v. Berkshire Justices (L. R. 4 Q. B. D. 471), that the decision of the justices on that point It was also argued that, should not be reviewed. under the old practice, a mandamus could only issue during term, and that under the Judicature Act, 1873, s. 26, and Rules of the Supreme Court, order 62, the old legal terms were preserved for the purpose of moving for a mandamus. The COURT made the rule absolute, with costs against the justices as well as the local board. The case cited had no application, for the decision there had been given by the justices in quarter sessions, who were, themselves, the judges of law and fact on appeal. In the present case the justices in petty sessions were required to do an act more ministerial than judicial, in order to found an appeal against their decision, and they had no jurisdiction to decide whether the application was in time. Their lordships were of opinion that the appellants were well within the time fixed by section 269 of the Public Health Act, 1875; and it was absurd to say that they must scour the country to find a magistrate, when they know that the petty sessions were to be held so soon. It was clear that under the Common Law Procedure Act, 1854, a mandamus could issue in vacation, and it could still do so. As to the costs it was, no doubt, unusual to give them against justices; but it was also unusual for justices actively to show cause against a manda. mus after a distinct notice that they would do so at their own risk.-SOLICITORS, Loughborough & Co. Societies. SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION. The forty-fifth half-yearly meeting of the members of the above association was held in the Cutlers' Hall, Sheffield, on the 9th inst. Mr. Sydney Smith (the chairman of the board of directors) presided. It was agreed to take the report, which was as follows, as read: share account, August 31 last, and a sum of £15 in the The CHAIRMAN, in moving that the report and statement of accounts should be received, adopted, and circulated in the usual way, alluded to the deaths of several members of the society, which had already been referred to in the halfyearly report for April; but at the country meeting they missed several faces which used to be present at those gatherings, especially that of Mr. A. Bain, of Liverpool, who always brought with him a long list of new members from his "The board have much pleasure in presenting this their own town. They must all regret the departure from this forty-fifth half-yearly report, in which they are glad to be life of that respected gentleman. Looking at the report, he enabled to state that the association continues to make pro- thought the society had gone on very fairly during the past gress in prosperity and usefulness. During the past half-half-year. They had obtained 127 new members, and their year 127 new members have been admitted, making, with those added during the previous half-year, a total of 171 new members admitted during the twelve months. The entire number of members enrolled is now 2,634, of whom 974 are life and 1,660 annual subscribers. Forty-five life members are also annual contributors of subscriptions ranging from one to five guineas. The usual abstract of the accounts, as audited, is appended to this report, from which it will be seen that the receipts during the past half-year have amounted to £2,141 3s. 9d.; which, with those of the preceding half-year, make a total of £4,278 48. 10d. received during the twelve months. The board have dispensed in relief during the half-year £1,350, £605 of which have been distributed among three members and the families of one insane and twelve deceased members, and £745 among eleven non-members and the families of fifty deceased non-members; which amounts, added to the grants made during the preceding halfyear, give a total of £2,235 applied to purposes of relief among members of the profession and their families during the twelve months last past. A balance of £620 17s. 1d. remained to the credit of the association with the Union Bank of London at the closing of the funds had increased, while the invested capital had been augmented by £40 or £50. With regard to the "Reardon Annuities," the directors in their April report suggested that thei ncome derived from the legacy when it was obtained should be divided thus :-Two annuities of £50 each, to be applied to members' cases, and two annuities of £25 each, to be eligible for non-members. The directors had not yet received the money, but he was glad to tell them that they had every reason to believe that the action commenced for administration of the estate would be shortly wound up and the money paid over to the society. He was not at liberty to say the exact amount which would come into the possession of the society, but he thought it would be nearer £5,000 than £3,000, which would be an appreciable addition to the capital of the institution. The dinner last summer did not realize so much as was expected. He could hardly think that as the society was at present constituted they could carry out all that was wished at the last meeting, but he might say that with all the funds intrusted to the directors they would do their best to carry out the wishes of the donors. He did not know that he need refer to the invested capital; the figures were before the meeting, and he hoped that they should go on increasing. He certainly should be pleased if they could increase the number of members. As the late chairman remarked at Cambridge last year, the number of members was small compared with the number of gentlemen in the profession, and looking at the very small sum which was necessary to make a solicitor a member, he was amazed that any man, especially a young man, who had a family depending upon his exertions, and who did not make money, should refuse to invest one guinea for the benefit of those depending upon him. He would not detain the meeting further except to express the thanks of the directors to the Sheffield Incorporated Law Society for permitting them to hold the meeting in that room. Mr. JOHN LEWIS (Wrexham) seconded the motion, and wished to refer to one of the observations which had fallen from the chairman with reference to the comparatively few members of the profession of the law who were members of the society; and he could not think that it was a liberal profession when there were so few men who could be found to give the small sum of a guinea a year towards relieving necessitous members and their families. With regard to the proposal for education, he thought with another member who said at the last meeting that bread and butter should be thought of before education. He was really not prepared to go so much with the spirit of the age that the one should be dispensed with in crder to obtain the other. Considering in these days of enforced education that it was brought within the reach of all classes by means of the Board Schools, he thought the society should not employ their funds in providing education for children. They must wait until their funds were materially increased. Mr. FRASER (London) asked whether, now that the society had invested funds, the directors dealt more liberally with grants than formerly? It was really not a benevolent society; it was established to relieve cases that might arise; therefore it was not right to add too much every year to invested capital. With regard to the necessity for an acquisition to the number of members, he begged to say that he always made it his duty to impress upon solicitors, and especially young ones, with whom he came in contact, the necessity of their becoming members of the society. If all the members of the society would do the same he believed there would be a great increase in the number of members. The CHAIRMAN said the directors never refused to give grants to the utmost, not of their power, but of what their opinion of the case deserved. Of course, they might take a very liberal view, and give £50 or £100, but the directors gave what they thought the case merited. They were only too happy to give the cases before them all proper consideration, and to deal with the applicants as liberally as possible. the Mr. A. TAYLOR (Sheffield) said he did not know whether it was out of order to discuss the question of subscription before the report was adopted, but after the remark which fell from the chairman he would wish to ask whether there had been a committee of solicitors appointed in each town to solicit subscriptions. At one meeting he saw a note made of one such committee having been appointed, and he thought that such bodies should be appointed all over country. He was proud of Sheffield, because a great proportion of the solicitors practising in that town were subscribers to the society. Of course this was praising themselves, but they could not help congratulating themselves upon the fact which he had mentioned. It was astonishing to see what a small number of practising solicitors subscribed to the society compared with the large number of gentlemen in the profession who did not subscribe one shilling towards its funds. There must be some reason for it. They were not going to suppose that the profession was illiberal to those among them who were unfortunate, and he thought that if the society was to take some more active steps to get in subscriptions they would find the effort would meet with a good reception. With regard to what had been said about education, he wished to say that he quite agreed with what had been said by the gentleman who had preceded him. There were so many facil ities for obtaining education afforded to those who were unable to pay for it, that he thought it would be rather travelling out of what the association was intended for to devote its funds to that cause. The CHAIRMAN said that if Mr. Taylor would kindly look at the report he would see that the society had three local committees of the description named, and the directors would like to have more. They were only too glad to appoint local committees where gentlemen were willing to serve, but hitherto they had found some difficulty in forming them. Mr. WATSON (Newcastle) said it would have considerable effect if the board was to bring the matter referred to by Mr. Taylor under the notice of the standing committees of the provincial law societies. If they took the matter ap the society would be likely to get more members in the towns where such societies existed. The CHAIRMAN said he was much obliged for the sug gestion, and when the directors met in London they would be glad to have it. The motion was then adopted, and Mr. W. H. GUEST (Manchester) moved that the best thanks of the meeting should be presented to the directors and auditors for their services during the past year, and that they should be re-elected. Mr. FARNFIELD (London) seconded the proposition, which was also carried. On the motion of Mr. YEOMANS (Sheffield), seconded by Mr. W. BROOK (London), a vote of thanks was accorded to the chairman, and this brought the meeting to a close. SOCIAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION. At the Edinburgh meeting on the 7th inst., Mr. Westlake, Q.C., read a paper on the question: "Should the law regarding domicile be amended-(A) as to the ascer tainment of domicile by registration or otherwise; (B) as to the substitution of political nationality for domicile where practicable, and is it practicable and expedient that such amendments should be embodied in international treaties?" After defining the legal meaning of domicile, he went on to consider the question, Should the law regarding domicile be amended by providing for the ascertainment of domicile by registration or otherwise? An example of what might be attempted in this manner was given by an Act of Parliament passed in 1861, he believed on the suggestion of Lord Kingsdown, empowering her Majesty to conclude with foreign countries conventions on the basis of reciprocity by which residence in the adopted country for one year preceding the death of a testator or intestate, together with the public deposit of a written declaration of a desire to change his domicile, should be made conditions of a change of domicile for all purposes of moveable succession. He submitted that, as between the different portions of the British Empire, the scheme of the Act of 1861 would be a great improvement on the present state of the law, and that since no convention would be necessary to introduce it to that extent, steps ought to be taken to introduce it at once. He concluded by suggesting that the laws of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and such British dependencies as it might be thought fit to legislate for, be amended by an Act of Parliament to the following effect:-1. That to the extent and in the manner that in the countries legislated for the moveable succession of a testator or intestate has heretofore been governed by the law of his domicile, the same shall in those countries be henceforth governed by the law of the State of which he was a subject or citizen, except so far as it may be necessary to refer to domicile, in consequence of the existence of different civil laws in one State. 2. That in any of the countries legislated for domicile shall not be acquired for any purpose of moveable succession unless the testator or intestate shall have resided in such country for one year immediately preceding his death and shall have publicly deposited a written declaration of his desire to become domiciled therein. Mr. C. H. E. CARMICHAEL, in a paper on International Copyright, drew attention to a recent judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States declaring unconstitutional a convention as to trade-marks, and asked whether the judgment, while directly affecting trade-marks, did not also by implication affect copyright? He had no desire to prove an affirmative. He would be very glad if the negative was satisfactorily proved. But it did seem to him necessary to raise the point if only to clear the way for future agreement between ourselves and the United States. He gladly acknowledged the apparently steady growth of a public feeling in America favourable to an international copyright convention; but it seemed to him obvious that if the power of Congress to legislate on copyright belonged to the same class of Congressional powers as trade-mark legislation, such a convention would not at present be worth the paper on which it was written. Therefore no pains which they could take to ascertain the true state of the case would be too great for the importance of the juridical and commercial interests at stake. At the present moment there could be no question that the Government of the United States was, through no apparent fault of its own, not carrying into effect the "obligations of reciprocity' "which it had undertaken with a foreign country-viz., France; and in the circumstances of the case, in the face of the decision of the Supreme Court, it seemed evident that the United States could not carry into effect any such obligations with any other foreign nation. The position was a difficult one, but the sooner the hard facts were faced the better it would be for all parties. It could not be supposed that any State would ask to enter into "obligations of reciprocity which the other contracting party might at any moment be enjoined by its judicature not to carry into effect. Supposing an international copyright convention to be ratified between this country and the United States, and such convention to be declared unconstitutional, the position of the British author and publisher in America would, he submitted, be far worse than at the present time. THE LEEDS COUNTY COURT JUDGE. On the 8th inst. Serjeant Tindal Atkinson, who since 1875 has discharged the functions of judge of the Leeds County Court, sat in that capacity for the last time, having been appointed to the Wilts and Dorset Circuit. The esteem in which his Honour is held was shown in the crowded condition of the court, both branches of the legal profession, barristers and solicitors, being numerously represented, and the public portions of the room being well filled. On his Honour's entrance, Mr. VINCENT THOMPSON, barrister, addressed him as follows:-I understand that to-day is the last day that we shall have the pleasure of appearing here while you occupy that bench. To allow this occasion to pass without a few words would be as repugnant to my feelings as it would be to those of my brethren at the bar, for whom I also speak. I feel that very few words will best befit the situation, and I can only say that we shall long bear in mind not only the exertions you have always made on behalf of the public in sacrificing your own ease to the public arrangements, and in giving to them that unvarying patience and attention which you have always displayed, but also the uniform courtesy and attention that you have always shown to my brethren of the bar and myself. If we have had anything to say that was worth hearing, your Honour has always listened to it, and given all the weight to it that it deserved. The memory of these most important qualities in a judge will long abide in our memories, and we do most heartily wish you long health and happiness, and many years of enjoyment of the milder clime and, perhaps, in some respects, the easier work of that district over which you are called to preside. Mr. FERNS, solicitor, followed on behalf of the solicitors : -Sir,-My brethren instruct me to say a few words. The judicial attention, the gentlemanly courtesy, the unvarying kindness with which both the profession and the public have been treated by your Honour have, I assure you, been so appreciated that they will not soon be forgotten; and when your Honour retires we shall each and all of us feel that we have lost a kind friend. When we take leave of you and you part from us, we all hope we shall not be forgotten. You, I assure your Honour, will not be forgotten. We all wish you long life; we wish that the public where you are going will value your services as much as we do who have so long experienced them; and on behalf of the bar and the public, I wish you "God speed." Mr. GRANGER spoke in a similar strain, and Mr. MARSHALL, the registrar of the court, also spoke. He said: If those who have had occasion to practise before you have had occasion to appreciate the kindness and courtesy which has distinguished your Honour while presiding in that seat, those who have been brought into official communica tion with you have not less cause to be grateful to your Honour for the kindliness-I may use a stronger word, and say the friendliness-with which our intercourse has always been regulated. We cannot let this opportunity pass without expressing to you our sense of the manner in which your official and other business has been transacted. I cannot affect to be surprised that your Honour has thought it wise to seek a less extended sphere of work, because no one, perhaps, better than Mr. Cautherley and myself is aware of the very great and, I may add, increasing amount of laborious and responsible business which has fallen to your Honour's share, and that does not always appear to the public, because we know, as no one else can do, that your Honour's labours do not end in this court. Therefore we cannot be surprised, though we may regret, that your Honour seeks a less extensive sphere of action. Yet in taking leave of us, and in going to the scene which awaits your Honour, you will carry with you the grateful remembrance of every member of the official staff of this court. His HONOUR replied in the following terms:-Mr. Thompson, Mr. Ferns, and gentlemen,—If no other cause existed, it would be scarcely possible, after the kind expressions that have been addressed to me, to sever myself from my connection with this court without feeling a lively sense of regret. From the earliest period of my taking my seat in this place to the present time I have had, with what has scarcely been an interruption, the great privilege to enjoy that good understanding between myself and the members of the two branches of the profession who form the practising bar of this court, without which the administration of justice becomes difficult and often painful. It is not too much to say advocate on the one hand, or forgetfulness of what was due that this has arisen from no sacrifice of the independence of the to the office of the judge on the other. There may have been, as there always will be, occasions when the temper of interests intrusted to his keeping, as well as that of the a zealous advocate, earnest, and honest in the discharge of the judge, has been in imminent danger of rising to a white heat, but there is no instance in my memory in which it went beyond a slight glow, which was extinguished as hastily as it was created. To the able and experienced thanks for the valuable and willing aid I have, whensoever officers of the court, without exception, I offer my sincere necessary, received at their hands; and I heartily congrat ulate my successor on the fact that in coming to the discharge of new and important duties, his great legal knowledge and recognized ability will find in this populous centre of industry, wealth, and enterprize a useful field for the employment of qualities which will receive a welcome appreciation from the suitors and practitioners of the court. All that remains for me is to thank you very sincerely for the very kind expressions of approval which accompany me to the new centre of less arduous labours. They will be remembered in after days with pleasure, and will serve to remind me that the true and only means to secure the approval and respect of those engaged in assisting in the public administration of justice lies in the direction of the faithful, able, and impartial discharge of the responsible and important duties which attach to the office of judge of these courts. I can only thank you very heartily. Appointments, Etc. Mr. NATHANIEL BAKER, barrister, has been appointed Secretary to the Boston Election Commission. Mr. Baker was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Trinity Term, 1867, and he practises on the Oxford Circuit and at the Gloucestershire and Worcestershire Sessions. Mr. EDWIN GRAY, solicitor, of York, has been appointed Under-Sheriff for Yorkshire, in succession to his father, Mr. William Gray. Mr. E. Gray was admitted a solicitor in 1872. Mr. THOMAS WILSON MICHELMORE, solicitor, of Bournemouth, has been appointed Clerk to the Kinson School Board. Mr. Michelmore was admitted a solicitor in 1874. DISSOLUTION OF PARTNERSHIP. EDWARD SOMERVILLE GIBNEY and GERALD ERNEST JORN GIBNEY, solicitors (E. S. & G. Gibney), 4, Queen-streetplace, Cannon-street, London. Sept. 12, Gerald Ernest John Gibney will continue to carry on the said business. (Gazette, Oct. 12, 1880.) Companies. WINDING-UP NOTICES. JOINT STOCK COMPANIES. LIMITED IN CHANCERY. GREENING AND FARDON, LIMITED.-Creditors are required, on or before Oct 22, to send their names and addresses and the particulars of their debts or claims to Alfred Ebenezer Wenham, Ann st, Birmingham HAY GREEN CORN MILL COMPANY, LIMITED.-Creditors are required, on or before Oct 30, to send their names and addresses and the particulars of their debts or claims to Charles Henry Marriott, Dewsbury, Nov 8 at 12 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims OLDBURY BRICK COMPANY, LIMITED.-Creditors are required, on or before Oct 13, to send their names and addresses and the particu lars of their debts or claims to Howard Samuel Smith, Bennett's hill, Birmingham. Nov 22 at 10 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims SILKSTONE AND DODWORTH COAL AND IRON COMPANY, LIMITED.Petition for winding up, presented Oct 7, directed to be heard before Malins, V.C. on Nov 5. Pritchard and Co, Little Trinity lane, for Grundy and Co, Manchester, solicitors for the petitioner [Gazette, Oct. 8.] CHESTERTON COAL AND IRON COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented Oct 2, directed to be heard before the M.R. on Nov 6. Emmett and Son, Bloomsbury sq, for Landor, Ruge. ley, solicitor for the petitioner FLAGSTAFF SILVER MINING COMPANY OF UTAH, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented Sept 21, directed to be heard before the M.R. on Nov 6. Kerly, Gt Winchester st, solicitor for the peti tioner SILKSTONE AND DODWORTH COAL AND IRON COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented Oct 11, directed to be heard before Malins, V.C. on Nov 5. Burn, Clement's lane, for Robinson and Gartside, Ashton-under-Lyne, solicitors for the petitioners [Gazette, Oct. 12.j UNLIMITED IN CHANCERY. GREAT BRITAIN FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY.-Petition for winding up, presented Sept 11, directed to be heard before the M.R. on Nov 6. Ashurst and Co, Old Jewry, solicitors for the petitioners [Gazette, Oct. 12.] FRIENDLY SOCIETIES DISSOLVED. WORMINGHALL AGRICULTURAL BENEFIT SOCIETY, School-room, Worminghall. Sept 29 [Gazette, Oct. 8.] Law Students' Journal. BIRMINGHAM LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. At a meeting of this society held in the Law Library on Tuesday, October 5, Mr. W. E. Taylor in the chair, a discussion took place on the following moot point: "Does the Statute of Limitations operate as a bar to a claim by a creditor against the separate estate of a married woman? Morton v. Turvill (2 P. Wms. 744); Vaughan v. Walker (6 Ir. Ch. Rep. 471, 8 Ir. Ch. Rep. 458); Hodgson v. Williamson (28 W. R. 944); Article in SOLICITORS' JOURNAL, Sept. 4, 1880, p. 817. The speakers in the affirmative were Messrs. Ludlow, Rogers, and O'Connor, and in the negative, Messrs. B. Smith, Barrows, Gem, and Whitehouse. The chairman having summed up, the question was put and decided in the affirmative. A vote of thanks to the chairman concluded the meeting. A solicitor, writing to the Times on the process of reduction of probate duty, says :-"We solicitors have to bear the brunt of the absurdity, and clients suppose we are making affidavits and accounts for mere costs' sake. Cannot our present Chancellor of the Exchequer reform such a small abuse as this ? " LONDON GAZETTES. Bankrupts. FRIDAY, Oct. 8, 1880. Under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. Creditors must forward their proofs of debts to the Registrar. To Surrender in London. Bacon, Walter Henry, the Mall, Kensington, Picture Dealer. Pet Ost 5. Brougham. Oct 19 at 11.30 To Surrender in the Country. Astle, Thomas, Blackfordby, Leicester, Grocer. bersty. Burton-on-Trent, Oct 21 at 11 Child, William Henry, Deal, Kent, Builder. Tunbridge Wells, Oct 19 at 3 Curtoys, Charles, Bath, Brewer. Pet Sept 25. 23 at 12 Goodacre, Sam, Lowdham, Nottingham, Miller. Nottingham, Oct 20 at 10.30 Pet Oct 6. Hub. Pet Oct 2. Cripps. Smith. Bath, Oct Pet Oct 5. Speed. Meredith, Robert, Llandudno, Carnarvon, Lodging house Keeper. Pet Oct 5. Jones. Bangor, Oct 21 at 12. 15 Pettit, Maria, and Matthew Hardiman Pettit, Yarmouth, Isle of Wight. Booksellers. Pet Oct 5. Blake. Newport, Oct 20 at 12 Rogers, George William, Norwich, Carpenter. Pet Oct 5. Cooke. Norwich, Oct 20 at 12 Stanley, William Morton, Redditch, Fishing Tackle Manufacturer. Pet Oct 4. Cole. Birmingham, Oct 19 at 2 White, John Thomas Porter Baxter, Deptford, Kent. Pet Oct 1. Pitt-Taylor. Greenwich, Oct 26 at 1 Bastin, Emma, Worcester, Hatter. Oct 21 at 3 at 7, Swithin st, Worcester Behenna, William, Plymouth, Grocer. thy, Courtenay st, Plymouth Oct 22 at 11 offices of Elwor Bradley, John, Hereford, Builder. Oct 23 at 4 at offices of Corner, High Town, Hereford Brangwin, Castle, Rhylston terrace, Fulham, Grocer. Oct 16 at 3 at offices of Bassett, Barnard's inn, Holborn Brennir, Henry Marston, Wethersfield, Essex, Professor of Music. Oct 18 at 2 at 161, Fleet st. St Aubyn Angrove, Serjeant's inn, Fleet st Brown, George Preston, Leamington Priors, Warwick, Pork Butcher. Oct 23 at 3 at offices of Overell and Son, Warwick st, Leamington Priors Burgess, John Thomas, High st, Whitechapel, Grocer. Oct 22 at 2 at Creditors' Association, Arthur st East. Learoyd and Co, Albion chambers. Moorgate st station Carruthers, Christopher, Longtown, Cumberland, Ironmonger. Clarke, John Hall, and John Thomas Atkins, Stonebridge rd, ct Clarke, Joseph, Ashton-under-Lyne, Lancaster, Waste Dealer. Oct 27 at 11 at offices of Toy and Broadbent, Park parade, Ashton. under-Lyne Clegg, John, Bilston, Stafford, Baker. Oct 19 at 12 at offices of Smith, Temple st. Birmingham Clunie, John, Winson Green, Birmingham, Builder. Oct 22 at 11 at offices of Burn and Co, Temple st, Birmingham Cockle, Alfred, Newtown, Bristol, Cooper. Oct 20 at 2 at offices of Johnson and Co, Arch House chmbrs, John st Colbourn, Thomas, Hoxton st, Hoxton, General Salesman. Nov 1 at 3 at 40, Southampton bldgs, Holborn. Cooper, Chancery lane Collett, Charles, Stow wood, Oxford, Farmer. Oct 25 at 11 at offices of Mallam, High st, Oxford Corker, Robert, High Harrogate, York, Butcher. Oct 21 at 11 at offices of Crumbie, Stonegate, York Cragg, Joseph, and Thomas Seward, Topsfield place, Crouch End, House Furnishers. Oct 20 at 2 at Guildhall Tavern, Gresham st. Crundall and Co, Cannon st Davis, Jane, Worcester, Licensed Victualler. Oct 22 at 12 at offices of Corbett, Avenue House, the Cross, Worcester Dobson, George, Middlesborough, out of business. Oct 19 at 2 at offices of Teale, Albert rd, Middlesborough Dobson, Robert, Egton, York, Farmer. Oct 27 at 11 at offices of Frankland and Co, Grape lane, Whitby |