thereby to remove or soften asperities engendered in the course of a business which has a large element of contention in it; and to obtain the consideration and criticism of the profession of proposed legislation affecting subjects with which we are principally concerned. These objects may be summed up as "the interests of the profession; they are not mere selfish interests, however, but such as may be pr»moted to the advantage of the public as well as the profession. There are gentlemen, members of this society, and I believe many of them, who wish to make it a power for good, who wish to bring their talents and energy to bear on those great questions of legal reform which are in the air. I sympathize with their wishes, and I trust the Hull Incorporated Law Society, which we now inaugurate, will afford them the opportunity they covet, and have a long career of usefulness. I thank Mr. Bedwell and our other guests for their good wishes. Other toasts followed, and during the evening several selections of music were given by a band of instrumentalists, interspersed with songs by the members present. DUBLIN AND ANTRIM JUNCTION RAILWAY COMPANY. Dec 11. Elliot LOSEBY, EDWARD, Leicester, Silversmith, Dec 1. Loseby v. Sarson, MCGILL, MARY, Dunham Massey, Cheshire. Dec 10. Gibson v. Bruce, V.C. Hall. Duncan, Liverpool Dec 10. Porteous ORME, MARY ANNIE, Guernsey, Channel Islands. Dec 31. Evans v. WATKINS, JAMES, Goodrich, Hereford, Butcher. Dec 10. Rosser v. Dec 31. BACON, JOHN WILLIAM, Albany rd, Old Kent rd, Gent. HUGHES, SUSAN, Strand. Dec 18. Roth v. Hughes, V.C. Hall. Stuart, WILKINSON, HENRY, High Buston, Northumberland, Farmer. Dec 10, Wilkinson v. Baird, V.C. Malins. Mirams, New inn, Strand [Gazette, Nov. 21.] CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. CAP. 25. ADDEY, EDWARD, Kingston-upon-Hull, Relieving Officer. Dec 31. Saw Mill Proprietor. Phillips and Son, AbAustralia, Contractor. Commercial Clerk. COLPAS, HENRY, Forest Creek, nr Melbourne, COSTA, AUGUSTO EDUARDO DA, Belem, Para, Brazil Merchant. Dec 12, DAY. WILLIAM, Southampton row, Confectioner. Dec 5. May, Russell sq EDMONSTONE, ELLEN, Spa, Belgium. Jan 1. Harrison and Beaumont, Wakefield EDWARDS, HENRY CHARLES, Penrith, Esq. Dec 18. Lonsdale, Carlisle FOREMAN, WILLIAM, Canterbury, Gent. Dec 15. Sankey and Co, Tyne HATCHER, WILLIAM HENRY, York rd, Battersea, Gent. Dec 1. Withall, Threadneedle st HAYLES, EUNICE, Hornton st, Kensington. Dec 8. Tatton, LowPhillimore pl HEMINGWAY, JAMES, Foden Bank, Macclesfield, Contractor. Dec 31. Swinburne and Parker, Bedford-row HETHERINGTON, JOSEPH HORATIO NELSON, Swan lane, Licensed Victualler. Dec 29. Peacock and Goddard, South sq, Gray's inn HOWLETT, SAMUEL, Woodbridge, Suffolk, Gent. Dec 19. Welton, Woodbridge HUNT, HEWRY, Preston, Lancaster, Wine and Spirit Merchant. Dec 8. Dodd, Preston JAMES, CATHERINE, Tennersfield, Hereford. Dec 20. Corner, Hereford JOHANNING, GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS EDWIN, New Brighton, Chester, Bookkeeper. Dec 1. Mason and Grierson, Liverpool LEVI, EDWARD, Stourbridge, Worcester, Bookseller. Dec 12. Bernard and King, Stourbridge MATTHEWS, JAMES, Croydon, Surrey, Gent. Jan 10. Lindsay and Co, MORGAN, JOHN, Shrewsbury, Corn Merchant. Dec 31. Nuisey, PILGRIM, JOHN, Hinckley, Leicester, Boatman. Dec 16. Wright and Hincks, Leicester ROSE, JAMES, Charlton, Kent, Market Gardener. Dec 23. Sampson, King st, Cheapside SILVA, JOSE PEREIRA DA, Lisbon, Portugal, Merchant. Dec 12. Crump and Son, Philpot lane SUTCLIOFE, JOSEPH, Fenay Bridge, York, Common Brewer. Jan 9. Fenton and Co, Huddersfield SUTHERLAND, JANE, Bath. Dec 13. Phillips and Son, Abchurch lane PETO, WILLIAM, Cookham, Berks, Farmer. Taylor, Furnival's inn Dec 20. Freeman Dec 15. Foster, Dec 20. Moore, Avocat. Dec 10. Dec 21. Pain and Dec 31. Hurford and POOLE. PAUL FALCONER, Greenhill, Hampstead, Artist. Dec 31. Cǝpping, Godliman st, Doc'ors'-com mons ROUGIER, HENRY, Inverness gardens, Kensington, Esq. Jan 10. Allen and Son, Carlisle st. Soho sq STEVENSON, MONTAGUE, Sheffield, Managing Director of Messrs. Je ssop and Sons. Jan 15. Braml-y, Sheffield SWIFT, GEORGE, Old Bond st. Military Tailor. Dec 31. Hurford and Taylor, Furnival's-inn, Holborn WISBY, MARY REBECCA. Cumberland Market, Regent's Park. Dec 13. Gough, Turle rd North, Hornsey Rise BURTON, HENRY MAY, Ipswich, Wholesale Grocer. Dec 20. Birkett and Bantoft, Ipswich CLUNES, THOMAS, Fowey, Cornwall, Esq. Jan 1. Allen and Beauchamp Worcester COOPER, HARRIET, Harwich, Es ex. Dec 31. Barnes, Harwich DANIELS, JOHN, Eccies, Lancaster, Boot and Shoe Dealer. Dec 13. DYKE, JOSEPH, Eastgate, Rochester, Gent. Dec 20. Offerton-Stevenson, Rochester FULLARTON, JOHN ALEXANDER, Elvaston pl, South Kensington, Gent. Dec 12. Kearsey and Co, Old Jewry GIBES, JOHN, Horpit, Wilts, Farmer. Dec 15. Kinneir and Tombs, Swindon GOEPEL, JANE SELTH, Offord rd, Barnsbury. Dec 31. Nutt and Co, HAWKES, ELIZABETH, Shardeloes rd, New Cross. Dec 16. Howard, HAWORTH, CALEB, Nelson-in-Marsden, Lancaster, Conveyancer. JAMES, CATHERINE, Tendersfield, Hereford. Dec 20. Corner, Here ford MALTBY, GEORGE, Maitland Park rd, Haverstock Hill, Gent. Jan 1. Ford and Co, Bloomsbury sq MCCREERY, SABAH, Lowndes sq. Dec 20. Paterson and Co, Chancery lane MILLARD, HENRY CANDISH, Southampton, Gent. Dec 31. Newton, MILLS. JOHN, Shorncliffe, Kent, Veterinary Surgeon. Dec 20. Steele, PAULI, CHARLOTTE, Landau, Rhenish Bavaria. Jan 13. Fielder and SCHMITZBERGEB, WENZESLAUS, Munich, Germany, Glass Engraver. mons [Gazette, Nov. 18.] County Courts. WANDSWORTH. (Before H. J. STONOR, Esq., Judge.) Nov. 11.-Salter v. Brooks; Montague, claimant. His Honour gave judgment in this case, which has been before the court several times. W. Attenborough was for the plaintiff and execution creditor. Bartlett, for the claimant. H. R. Jones watched the case for the high bailiff. His HONOUR said :—The points involved in this case are of great importance, not only to high bailiffs and officers of county courts, but also to sheriffs and officers executing the process of other courts, and to purchasers of goods under such executions. The plaintiff early in August last obtained execution against the defendant's goods for debt and costs amounting to £83 1s. 8d., and the bailiff took possession of all the goods in the plaintiff's house, No. 227 in Batterseapark-road, and on the 15th of August they were appraised and valued at the sum of £18 18s. 8d., and on the same day they were sold for that sum to the claimant. The sale took place on the premises, the claimant paid the money to the bailiff, the latter delivered to the claimant and quitted possession. The claimant took the bailiff's receipt (which was dated the following day, viz., 16th of August), for "the sum of £18 18s. 8d., as per appraisement and inventory annexed," but no appraisement or inventory was then annexed to the receipt or delivered to claimant, and there is no actual mention of the goods in the receipt. Two or three days afterwards, however, an inventory was sent to the claimant by the bailiff. The claimant, immediately on purchasing and getting possession of the goods, gave the execution debtor permission to use them until he (the claimant) other-wise disposed of them, and left the execution debtor in possession of them. Neither the receipt nor inventory was registered under the Bills of Sale Act, 1878. Early in September, the plaintiff, the execution creditor, took out another execution against the goods of the defendant, and called upon the bailiff to seize again the same goods which had been purchased and paid for by the claimant, and the purchase-money for which the plaintiff had received through the court, the plaintiff alleging that under the 4th and 8th sections of the above Act, the receipt and inventory, or one of them ought to have been registered within seven days, and that at the expiration of the seven days, the goods being in the apparent possession of the defendant, the bailiff was bound to seize them again as the property of the defendant. The bailiff accordingly seized the goods again, and appraised them at the sum of £17 2s. 6d., and the claimant again claimed the goods and paid into court that sum which is the subject of the present interpleader. Shortly after regaining possession of the goods, claimant sold fendant's interest in his house and the good-will of his them to one William Gillett, who also purchased the debusiness, and went into possession of the same, and also of the goods, and retained the defendant as foreman of the business at a salary of 36s. a week, and allowed him still to live in the house, but the plaintiff, the execution creditor, actually took out another execution, and required the bailiff to seize the goods a third time on the same grounds as on the second time, which he accordingly did. Gillett then put in a claim to the goods, which became the subject of a second interpleader summons, on which he recovered, as there was clearly no apparent possession in the execution debtor. The first question on the present claim is whether the bailiff's receipt of the 10th of August and inventory are required to be registered under the Bills of Sale Act, 1878. The terms employed in the Act are very wide, and include "receipts for the purchase of goods," but only such "inventories" as are "attached to receipts." Therefore, in the present case, the receipt is prima facie within the Act, but the inventory is not. There are, however, in the 4th section of the Act, savings of "transfers of goods in the ordinary course of business of any trade or calling," and also of documents used in the ordinary course of business as proof of the possession or control of goods; and I am inclined to think that the document now in question, viz., the receipt, would come under one, and perhaps both, of these savings, for though a bailiff has no "trade," CP CP 93 Lawson (Tucker, B and Co) v Yeomans (Collette and C) 95 Jasmins (Lowless and Co) v Hyde (Hollams, Son and C), QB 96 Vanderzee and Co (Simpson and C) v Campbell, Robertson QB 97 Weigel (W Beck) v Anderson and ors (Hollams, Son and Ex CP be certainly has a calling." Assuming, however, that CP CP CP CP СР Ex Ex Ex CP Ex LIST OF ACTIONS FOR TRIAL. 1 The Chartered Mercantile Bank of India, London, and China (Waltons, B and W) v The Netherlands India Steam Navigation Co, limd (Lovell and Co), commission SJ 2 Frowein and ors (Stephen Scott) v Sonnenthal (Ashurst, M and Co), stayed SJ 3 Allan (Roberts and B) v Wakefield (Waltons, B and W), SJ 4 Breffit (A Jones, T and G) v Williams (Norris, A and C), stayed 5 Hanbury (Mercer and Mercer) v Grant and Clark and Punchard, and 77 other actions against the same defendants (Ashurst, M and Co; Blunt, T and L), postponed SJ 83 James Watt and Co (G Webb) v Mersey Steel and Iron Co, limd (Norris, A and C), SJ 84 Ostrom and Fischer (HJ Coburn) v Heintz (Nash and F), stayed 85 Rathbone and ors (Freshfields and W) v Caldwell (J B Towse), commission SJ QB 86 Leese (Jno Frost) v Household (Field, R and Co), stayed SJ 87 Masaru and ors (Murray, Hutchins and Co) v Hobley (Hollains, Son and C), commission SJ CP CP 88 Keay and anr (Pritchard and Sons) v Young and ors (Clarkes, R and C; J Scott; Burton, Y and Co; Belfrage and M), SJ 89 Amazon Tug and Lighterage Co, limd (Ashurst, M and Co) v Earle's Ship Building and Engineering Co, limd (Chester, U and Co), commission SJ QB 90 Pedersen (Johnsons, U B and A) v Dobell and Co (Field, R QB 91 Dreyfus, Freres and Cie (Stibbard, G and Co) v Watts CP 92 Gardiner (Waltons, B and W) v Warns (F Bradley), stayed 98 Young (Wilkins, B and F) The Senora Co and ors (Elmslie and Co; Mozley and S), SJ 99 A Tesdorpf and Co (Waltons, B and W) v Gates (T Cooper and Co), stayed SJ Ex 100 Bilbrough (Hacon and T) v Henderson (Dawes and Sons), commission SJ CP 101 Reynolds (J P Garrod) v Cooper (Fisher and Co), postponed CP 103 Strauss and Co (F W Mount) v Continential Daily Parcels QB 104 Morgan (J R Greening) v Finlay (Hollams, Son and C), SJ QB 106 Alexander (J C Campbell) v McMaster (Venning, R and J), stayed CP 107 Silva and anr (W A Crump and Son) v Larking and anr (Lowless and Co), commission Ex 108 Brown (T H E Foord) v Groom (Pownall, Son C and K); Groom (T HE Foord) v Brown (Pownall, Son C and K), consolidated, postponed CP 109 Leary and Co (Markby, S and Co) v Wiarda (G J Jennings), QB 110 The Central African Trading Co, limd (Flux and Co) ▼ QB 111 Falkenburg and Hesse (Hollams, Sons and C) v Kumpers CP 113 Beeson (Farnfields) v Culliford and ors (Hollams, Son and Q B 114 Dale and Spring (Hollams, Son and C) v Wakefield (Wal- QB 115 Dickinson (Haywood, K and S) v S Stanbridge (Clapham CP 116 Finch (H Montagu) v Dixon (Argles and R), com SJ Ex 118 Hackett (Scard and Son v Gisby (Robert Wood), stayed CP 120 Berla, Cotrim and Co (Norton, R and Co) v E Pellass and QB 121 Eklof (Stokes, S and S) v Greenhow and Co (Billinghurst CP 122 Bordes (Johnson, U B and A) v Peruvian Guano Co, limd (JB Batten) commission SJ Ex 123 Vickers and anr (W Tanner) v Bird and anr (Wild, B M and W), stayed Ex 124 Gardner (Randall and A) v Withernsea Pier, &c, Co (Milne, R and M), commission QB 125 Prieto (J Andrews) v Chadwick and Son (S Mayhew), QB 126 Bramwell (Hollams, Son and C) v Levi and Co (Ingledew, CP 127 Preston (Parker and Co) v The Cleveland Extension QB 123 C Tennant and Co (M Shephard) v Ellis, Kislingbury and Ex 129 Jacobs and anr (A E Sydney) v Craig and anr (G H Finch), commission SJ QB 130 Angestad and ors (Plews, I and Co) v Knights (Parsons and L) QB 131 Johannesen (Same) v Same (Same) QB 132 Berlin, &c., Co., limd (Rooks & Co) v Combe and Wain- Ex 133 Bolton (Munns and L) v The Marine and General Life QB 134 Hutton (T Allingham) v Bevan and ors (Janson, Cobb, and QB 135 Rogerson and Son (Courtenay and C) v Uzielli (Waltons, QB 136 Rumcker and Rymer (Hollams, Son and C) v Susman (H QB 137 Thomson and ors (Ingledew, I and G) v Grant and ors Ex 138 Bunnett and Co, limd (Renshaw and R) v Potter and Sons (Prior, B C and A), SJ QB 139 Arnold and Co (Robinson and H) v Grautoff and Co (Nicol, Sons and J), stayed SJ CP 140 Argles and anr (Argles and A) v Thomas (In Person), SJ CP 143 Mackey (T W Goldring) v Lovegrove (E H Parnell) CP 146 Parker (Digby and Jones) v Barrell (S T Cooper) Ex 149 Porter and Co (Champion, R and P) v Duncanson (Walton, CP 150 Perry (Crook and S) v Oughton and Son (Withal and C) CP 151 Gleiper (Angell, Terry and P) v Great Eastern Ry Co (Ć A Curwood) SJ CP 152 Belmonte and ors (Ashurst, M and Co) v Gutschow and Ford, Trustees, &c (W A Crump and Son; Saunders, H and Co), without jury, commission (To be continued.) MIDDLESEX.-MICHAELMAS SITTING, 1879. LIST OF ACTIONS FOR TRIAL. (Continued from page 76.) Ex 459 Amoss (W W Brown) v London and Provincial Horse and Ex 460 Falk and anr (H W Christmas) v Hatton (J J Hutchinson) QB 463 Jenner and anr (T M Attwell) v Puxley and Wife (G F and Ex 464 Slade (Ingle, C and H) v The Great Eastern Ry Co (CA Curwood) SJ QB 465 Blizard (Palmer, E and N) v Poynter and ors (Brat dons). Ex 466 Philpott (Deane, C and Co) v Gill (A S Edmunds and Son) Ex 467 Wingrove (Hilleary and T) v Tubbs and anr (Chappell, W and C) QB 468 Andrews (F Cotton) v Vicar and Churchwardens of West Teignmouth (G E Philbrick) Ex 469 Taylor (G J Jennings) v Metropolitan Tram Co (HC Godfray) Ex 470 Yates (Hilleary and T) v Same (Same) CP 471 Sheward (Allen and Son) v Earl Lonsdale (Ellis and Ellis) SJ QB 472 McMillan (W H Holland) v Hider (W Sharman) Ex 473 Crowe (Hardwicke and J) v Thornton and. ors (Mullens and B) Ex 474 Ward (W M Flegg) v Knox (Tidy and T) CP 475 Mullis (Woodbridge and Sons) v D'Avigdor (Futvoye, F and B) CP 476 Burrell (Todd and Dennes) v Ireland and anr (R Voss) QB 479 Williams (T D Dutton) v Monico and anr (G F and M Rooper) Ex 480 Putt (W Vant) v Lees (J P Poncione) Ex 481 Grant (T W Lenby) v Pilkington (J Cotton) CP 482 Stockwell (C A Cosedge) v Stockwell (T M Attwell) Ex 483 Eyre (Tadman and B) v Norris and Norris (J J Winser) SJ QB 494 Brown (W Maynard) v Doo (W Royle) QB 485 Venables (H M Pike) v Rowley and anr (C Thorp; Taylor and T) QB 486 Huni Bros (F Clift) v Brandt (D Aston); Same (Same) v Same (Same) consolid ted CP 487 Breffit (J R Tindale) v Weir (Bell, B and Co) Q B 488 Gaisford (G Thompson) v Miller and anr (In Person) CP 489 Bull and anr (Tyrrell, Lewis and Co) v Perry and Co and anr (Munns and L; R Mote) SJ Ex 490 Holland, by next friend (F R Coote) v Mead and anr (Bicknell and H; Tilley and S) CP 491 Sargeant (Speechley, M and Co) v Winney and anr (G Brown and Sons) Ex 492 Milsom (T Bordman) v London and North-Western Ry Co (RF Roberts) Ex 493 Ponsford (Bartley and James) v Wyld (C O Newman) Ex 405 Llewellyn (T White and Sons) v Strangward (Saunders, H and B) SJ CP 406 Rainbow and Wife (Prior, Bigg and Co) v Juggins (C Mallam) Ex 497 Newman, trading, &c (W H Hudson) v Harris and Co (Joel Emanuel and Co) Ex 499 Same (Same) v Gregg (Fallows and B) Ex 499 Lumley (Same) v Buklish and anr (Lewis and Lewis) Ex 508 Blane and anr (G Castle) v Mitchener and anr (Stocken and J) QB 509 Wilson (Hewitt and A) v Visct Bury and ors (White, Bor. rett and Co; Linklater and Co) QB 510 Capital and Counties Bk (Nash and F) v Henty and Sons (Robinson, Preston and S) CP 511 The London Necropolis and National Mausoleum Co (Har- QB 513 Schofield (F Fearon) v Giles (A H Miller) Ex 516 Burrows (Wright and P) v Biss (W H Elcum) Ex 519 Bayley (Gamlen and Son) v Kelday (E Moss) CP 520 Wright and Wife (T C Russel) v Truman, Hanbury and Co (T Beard and Sons) CP 531 Brown (W Maynard) v Hancox (F T Dubois) QB 522 Flensburger Dampfschiff fahrt Geselschaft von 1869 and anr (J Crowdy and Son u Dodds, trading, &c (Sharp and U) SJ QB 523 Oakeshott, extrix (F and T Smith and Sons) v Taylor (Pittman and S) QB 524 Beale (A G Ditton) v Clarke (H W M Wetherfield) Ex 525 Vandy (H S Harris and G) v N Metropolitan Tram Co (H C Godfray) QB 526 Harcourt (W T Manning) v Clark (C Thorp) CP 527 Wildash, by next Friend and anr (Same) v South-Eastern Ry Co (WR Stevens) QB 528 Monkhouse (Van Sandau and C) v Laing (Jackson and J) CP 529 Harrison and anr (Harrisons) v Harris (Lewis and I) without jury Ex 530 Hunting and anr (Shaen, R, M and S) v Owen (Mickle thwait and Co) CP 531 Rattenbury (G H Finch) v Brinton and Co (Day and H) Mote) Ex 537 Bass and Co (R H Wilkin) v Horne (Hurford and T) Ex 540 Goodfellow (A G Ditton) v Durant (T Durant) QB 542 Field, John (H J Jennings) v Great Western Ry Co (R_R Nelson) QB 543 Field, Henry (Same) v Same (Same) QB 544 Field, sen, and Wife (Same) v Same (Same) QB 546 Field by next Friend and T Field (Same) v Same (Same) QB 549 Press and Wife (JT Hazeldine) v N Metropolitan Tram Co(H C Godfray) Ex 550 Spaul (W H Sturt) v Phipps and ors (Elwes and S) CP 552 James (J Evans) v James (Lewis and Sons) Ex 553 Scrine (G R Harrison) v McKay (J Cotton) without jury QB 557 Gordon (Ley and M) v Philp (Crouch and F) CP 558 Gauz (Chappell, Son and G) v Evans (Lewis and L) CP 560 Besant (Philbrick and Co) v Bevan, trading, &c (Farne fields) CP 561 Thorley Cattle Food Co ld (W Eley) v Watson (Argles and A) QB 562 Ruding (J and M Pontifex) v Real Property Trust, limd, and anr (Ashurst and Co) QB 563 Pepperell (J R Tindale) v The Marquis of Townshend (WA Day) SJ Ex 564 Davis (Wa ter, Jarvis and T) v Nottage and anr (T Micklem) SJ QB 565 Richardson (Bird, M and R) v Oldham and Canning (Mathews and S) SJ CP 566 Chambers (F Norton) v Gaches and anr (Pitman and Smart) without jury Ex 567 Smith (T W Goldring) v Clark (G Reader) Ex 568 Parris (J N Mason) v Blowes (Beaumont and W) Legal News. It is announced that the courts will sit at the Guildhall for the trial of special and common jury causes on the 1st of December, and thence until December 21. The courts will continue to sit at Westminster during the same period for the trial of common jury actions. Charles Blake, of Newport, Monmouthshire, described as a solicitor, was charged on a warrant before Mr. Vaughan at Bow.street, on Tuesday, with obtaining £100 by false pretences and with intent to defraud. Mr. Romer Williams,, Lincoln's-inn-fields, appeared to prosecute, and said the of the firm of Williams, James, & Wason, solicitors, warrant was granted for the prisoner's arrest in September last. Mr. Eugene Wason, of the firm of Williams, James, & Wason, solicitors, Lincoln's-inn-fields, deposed that, on. the 15th of September last, the prisoner called at his office and asked for a loan of £500. He was asked what security he could give, and he replied that he was entitled under the will of his grandfather, Thomas George Orton, to nine houses in Lambeth realizing a rent of £260 per annum. could not produce the copy of the will then, but gave a reference. He was told that in addition to that, certificates of his birth and his parents' marriage would be required, and He that as it appeared that he was only contingently entitled, he would have to insure his life. He pressed very hard for an advance the same day, but it being impossible until the will had been seen, witness promised to go to Somerset House early the next morning and bespeak a copy. Being aware that he was a solicitor at Newport, Monmouthshire, witness asked why he did not go to his own agents, but he replied that he preferred the loan being made independently. He was asked several times whether he had borrowed money, or in any way dealt with his reversion under the will, and reminded that, as a solicitor, he must know the risk of lending money on such a security. He was told that had it not been for the introduction with which he came, witness would have no dealings with him. To dispense with the services of a valuer, witness requested to see the property, and left with the prisoner in a cab, and drove to Royal-street, Lambeth, where they went in a house, and witness inquired of a woman to whom she paid her rent. She replied to Mr. Blake. The next day witness went to Somerset House and bespoke a copy of the will, after reading it. The prisoner called at the office later on, and he was informed by witness that the will had been perused, and copies of his parents' marriage certificates had been obtained, and that if he was, as he described, their only son, there would be no objection to the allowance at six per cent. He agreed to those terms, and was told that a declaration would be required to prove that he was the only son and the property was unincumbered. The prisoner pressed very hard for £100 in advance, and witness let him have that sum until he could obtain a client to take up the loan. A cheque was handed to him and his I O U accepted for the amount. Business being very pressing at the time the declaration was not filled up. It was arranged that he should call again on the 20th to complete the loan. He came on that day, and stated that he had been to the insurance office. Witness had that morning received an anonymous letter warning him not to lend any money to the prisoner, as he had no security to offer. He cautioned him as to the statements he had already made, and read over the declaration that had been prepared for him to sign. He declared everything to be correct, and signed it in the presence of witness as 8 magistrate of the county of Ayr. Witness then handed bim the anonymous letter, and asked him if he could give any clue to the writer. He said he could not at first, but subsequently said he thought it must be his uncle. He asked if there would be any objection to his taking the letter. There being none raised, he was allowed to take it. He was, however, told that the negotiations for the loan would be suspended until the letter had been explained. He went away, and on the 22nd of September witness received the following letter:-" London, 22nd of September, 1879. -My dear Sir,-With the greatest amount of shame and regret that it is possible for a man to feel, I write to acknowledge to you that what I declared to you about the Lambeth property being unincumbered was untrue. The fact is that losses at betting, and not being paid what is owed to me, have nearly driven me out of my mind, and I have for the last three months been perfectly reckless. I, however, really believed, and still do, that I should have been able to have paid you the £500 out of money really due to me, and the £100 I can and will pay you with interest within two months from now. I know all this is no excuse for it, in a case like mine especially, for a solicitor there can be no possible excuse. Still, I ask you not to proceed to extremities, as that would prevent my being able ever to pay you. I know I deserve that you should do so more than usually, but I only ask you if you decide not to prosecute me to put an advertisement in the front page of the Standard on Wednesday addressed to C. B., and saying that no proceedings will be taken. If so, I will return to town and do my utmost to return your money at once. I have given up, of course, my companion. I have no home, and not £5 in my pocket, so I can't be much lower down. I perhaps need hardly tell you that I shall be far enough off when this is delivered, but I want, if possible, to try to repair the injury I have done you. I can hardly write.-CHARLES BLAKE." Witness stated that he had advanced the money on the faith of the prisoner's representations. Serjeant Partridge, detective E Division, arrested the prisoner at Bernard-street, Russell. square. When taken into custody he asked witness his name, and on being told it said he was aware that he had been after him, but expressed a hope that his (prisoner's) friends would repay the prosecutor. The prisoner reserved RICHARD HORNSBY & SONS (LIMITED).—It is proposed to convert the old established firm of Richard Hornsby & Sons, manufacturers of steam engines, agricultural machinery and implements, into a limited liability company, with a capital of £300,000 in 30,000 shares of £10 each. An agreement has been entered into with Messrs. Hornsby for the purchase of the freehold premises, together with the plant and machinery, patents, contracts, and stock-in-trade, for the sum of £234,772 17s. 6d., and the vendors take, in part payment of the purchase-money, £50,000 in five per cent. mortgage debentures (part of an intended issue of £100,000), and also subscribe for 10,000 shares on the terms of the prospectus. The death of the late Mr. Richard Hornsby, and the consequent withdrawal of a considerable amount of capital, has induced the vendors to convert the business into a company. No promotion money will be paid, and there is no payment for good-will. It may be mentioned that no application for shares will be received after December 3 from London, and the following day from the country. Subscriptions are invited for the remaining £400,000 of debenture capital of the Eastern and South African Telegraph Company (Limited). The share capital of this undertaking-£400,000-was fully subscribed some time ago, and a large part of the line, the secions from Natal to Zanzibar, has been completed and opened for traffic, while the remaining section to Aden is to be laid by December 31. The debentures represent a total of £600,000, of which £200,000 has already been subscribed. The interest is at the rate of five per cent., and they are redeemable at par within twenty years. The annual charge under both heads is £48,200, as security for which the company |