sense above explained—that is, of construction-there are only the general principles of the common law to guide us, as such principles are expressed and applied in such like cases as Backhouse v. Bonomi (9 H. L. C. 503); Nicklin v. Williams (10 Ex. 259); and Lamb v. Walker (26 W. R. 775, L. R. 3 Q. B. D. 389).

The general principle is admitted, and will not be questioned, that in every action the ground of which is injuria cum damno, the damages sustained from the injuria (as well the future or prospective as the past and present damages) must be recovered in that action once for all, and no subsequent or second action will lie in respect of the same injuria for such future or prospective damages, even when they have not been recovered in the original action (Clegg v. Dearden, 12 Q. B. 576); and this principle was re-affirmed in the decision of Lamb v. Walker, by the Queen's Bench Division, in May, 1878 (see also Mayne on Damages, 3rd ed., pp. 84-86; 387-388). It is, however, in the application of this principle that the difficulty regarding these refuseheaps, &c., arises. Because, while the original deposit of the refuse is an injuria (at common law) or (what is in effect the same thing) a circumstance entitling to compensation for damage (under the title), the difficulty is what to think of the continuance of the refuse upon the surface-scilicet, is such continuance like a continuing trespass, a fresh injuria or fresh circumstance in respect of which (when coupled with the damage flowing therefrom) a fresh cause of action arises? The judgment of the Lord Chief Justice of England in Lamb v. Walker would be consistent with the view that the continuance of the refuse was a continuing injuria; but the judgments of the two other judges in that case (Manisty and Mellor, JJ.) would not be consistent with it; although, in fact, none of these judgments contain anything expressly in point, the action having been one for damage resulting from the withdrawal or diminution by one landowner of the adjacent support which his land afforded to the land of the plaintiff (a neighbouring landowner). Also, in leases of mines with surface rights, the writer has not unfrequently come across provisions by which the annual rent payable for surface taken is made to extend to surface not taken under the lease, but taken under any previous lease or leases, so long as such land continues (not necessarily to be used as auxiliary to the mining operations, but) unrestored; and in all such leases it is very usual to insert a covenant to restore the surface, or else to pay the fee-simple value thereof, and in the meantime to continue paying the annual rent. On the other hand, no such distinction as that suggested was attempted to be taken (judging from the reports), or was successfully taken, in Clegg v. Dearden, where the act from which the damage flowed was an injuria in the strict and proper sense of the word; and regarding the case of Mordue v. Dean, &c., of Durham, where the act from which the damage flowed was one wrongful in itself, but under the title whereby the mines and lands were severed rendered rightful, it is carrying that case too far to say either that it is against, or that it is in favour of, the distinction we have suggested. Bovill, C.J., does indeed remark that, with respect to an old pit-shaft existing at the date of the conveyance, no compensation could be claimed for its mere continuance in existence"; but then that case also decided that the compensation for damage recoverable was to be estimated with reference to the value of the land for any purpose, and that the compensation was to include damage by severance or otherwise, and not merely the value of the land actually taken.

Is it possible that the distinction we have suggested does not hold good in respect of a trespass or other injuria strictly and properly so called (Clegg v. Dearden), but that it does hold good in respect of acts which (subject to the liability for damage or for compensation) are rightful and not wrongful acts, in respect that they are acts flowing out of ownership, or are acts rendered right by contract or by grant? Some corroboration of

this suggested view is to be found in Aspden v. Seddon (23 W. R. 580, L. R. 10 Ch. 394) in the judgments of Jessel, M.R., and the late Lord Justice Mellish.

Regarding the other questions proposed in this article, the answer depends more or less in the case of each upon the opinion which may eventually prevail in regard to the principal question above discussed; but one thing appears to be certain, that the right to damages or even to compensation is a chose in action so far as regards all damage occasioned prior to the purchase deed; consequently, that such right, so far as regards such damage, does not pass to the purchaser as portion of, or as incidental to, his land, although of course he may acquire the chose in action by special agreement with his vendor, and obtain an express assignment thereof from

him.

REVIEWS.

ACTION IN THE COMMON LAW DIVISIONS. PRÉCIS OF AN ACTION AT COMMON LAW, SHOWING AT A GLANCE THE PROCEDURE UNDER THE JUDICATURE ACTS AND RULES IN AN ACTION IN THE QUEEN'S BENCH, COMMON PLEAS, AND EXCHEQUER DIVISIONS OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. By HERBERT E. BOYLE, Solicitor. Butterworths,

Mr. Boyle has put into a very short compass the proceedings in a common law action, and by ingenious arrangements as to type, he brings the various steps very clearly before the reader. The book can hardly fail to be of service to the student. The Rules of Court appear, from the passages we have examined, to be carefully condensed, and occasional references are given to cases. The book appears to us to be executed with more than average care.

We have received another letter from our indefatigable correspondent, Mr. W. G. Walker. He appears to abandon all his objections to our review of his book except two. (1) He says, "I said [i.e., in his last letter] that in Burdick v. Garrick there was no proof that the person in the fiduciary position had made interest or profit on the money in his hands. It is no refutation of this to say that he made use of the money. It is common enough for the use of money to result, not in profit, but in loss. Burdick v. Garrick says it is not necessary that, in order to charge an executor with interest on money in his hands, you should prove that he has made a profit; it is enough that by the wrongful retainer he might have made one." In this last sentence Mr. Walker kindly supplies the answer to his former criticism. There being proof that the trustee had used the trust funds, that was tantamount, as regards the trustee's liability, to proof that he had made a profit by them, for where a trustee engaged in trade "makes use of the trust fund, as in Burdick v. Garrick, by paying it into his own account at his bankers, he is always presumed to have made trade profits. As Romilly, M.R., said in Williams v. Powell (15 Bav., at p. 469), "the burden lies on the executor to show that, in fact, he has not had benefit in his trade from this increased balance at his bankers." We do not know that we need say more on this singularly unimportant point than thank Mr. Walker for explaining our meaning.

But (2) Mr. Walker wishes to state that in our review we "suggested, as the source from which he ought to have been aware of the Indian Act of 1874, only the article in the SOLICITORS' JOURNAL for 1878." We beg to say that we did not make any suggestion whatever in our review as to the only source from which Mr. Walker ought to have been aware of that Act, but we did suggest in our answer to his letter that if he had either read one of the cases he

cites, or had taken the trouble to look in Lewin on Trusts,

he could have found local Indian Acts referred to which

would have given him sufficient warning to enable him, with the help of the chronological table to the Indian Re. vised Statutes in Lincoln's-inn Library, and of the librarian, to discover the Act of 1874. To this suggestion Mr.

Walker has two objections to offer. First, the local Acts mentioned in Lewin were repealed in 1855. What on earth does it matter? We did not say that Mr. Walker ought to have quoted the local repealed Acts, but that the mention of these Acts in Lewin might have enabled Mr. Walker to find his way to the Act in force. Secondly, Mr. Walker says the chronological table of the Indian Statutes "was not received in Lincoln's-inn Library till some six or seven weeks after his manuscript had been committed to the press." This is too absurd. Have matters really come to such a pass that text-book writers are to be excused from trying to find a statute because, forsooth, the chronological table had not been received at the nearest library? How long would it have taken Mr. Walker either to walk to the British Museum Library, or to drop a note on the subject to the India Office?

CORRESPONDENCE.

BANKRUPTCY LEGISLATION.

[To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.] Sir, I observe from the Queen's Speech that the House of Commons will, during the present session, be asked to consider "measures for the further reform of the law of bankruptcy."

I think it will be at once admitted, that if any system I could be devised whereby a considerable saving in the realization of the estates of liquidating debtors or bankrupts could probably be effected, the interests of the commercial world must be materially benefited.

With this object in view, I venture to offer the following suggestions:

1. In every large town in England and Wales, being a local centre possessing bankruptcy jurisdiction, there should be established a thoroughly competent official accountant, with a proper and sufficient staff of assistants, all to be appointed by Government at fair salaries. The duties of such accountant and assistants to consist:

(a.) Of the preparation of petition, affidavit, request, and list of creditors, &c., on behalf of any debtor desiring | to present such petition in person. In cases where the services of a receiver and manager are needed, the Government accountant to fill that position.

(b.) In all cases (that is to say, whether the debtor employs a solicitor or not) the official accountant to prepare the statement of affairs for the statutory first meeting, and to take the trusteeship in the event of resolutions for liquidation being passed; to receive and distribute composition, if same accepted by the creditors, and, generally to realize (in liquidation); to declare a dividend upon, and to close every estate in the most expeditious manner, and all this free of expense. I would not dispense with a committee of inspection, where liquidation is resolved upon, but the same relation as now exists to a trustee should be continued as to the official accountant.

(c.) The solicitor filing the petition to register all resolutions passed; to act as solicitor to the trustee, the committee of inspection, and the estate, and to take all such other steps as might be necessary and such as are usual under the Act and Rules now in force. Such solicitor to be entitled, as heretofore, to his costs, to be taxed.

2. It will at once be asked by those conversant with the subject, From what fund is the expense of the employment of Government accountants and clerks to be defrayed? My answer is, let the stamp duty payable upon every petition, affidavit, request, and list of creditors, gazetting, application, summons, ad valorem on registration of resolutions, on assets or composition, &c., be slightly increased-that is to say, the scale of fees to be revised to meet and cover the necessary outlay to be made by the Government-e.g., upon a liquidation petition, say £1 10s. instead of £1; on an affidavit

OPTION TO PURCHASE.

[To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.]

Sir, I read with great interest your recent article on the effect of the insertion in a lease of an option to purchase on the devolution of real estate under the lessor's will; but it seems to me that the important distinction which is made when a testator specifically devises or sets out in detail his property is not noticed. I gather from the cases that the effect of this particularising of the property would be that it would pass according to the limitations of the will which would have been applicable to the property in case there had been no sale. If this is a wrong assumption I shall be glad to be set right.

Manchester.

WM. BARNETT. [We were not referring to the case of a specific de vise.—Ed. S.J.]

On Monday week, Lord Gifford, one of the judges of the Second Division of the Court of Session in Scotland, had a paralytic seizure, which seriously affected his speech.

In the House of Commons, on Tuesday, Sir R. Cross asked the First Lord of the Treasury whether he would take steps to insure to the House an opportunity of discussing the Order in Council abolishing the offices of Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas and Lord Chief Baron, recently laid upon the table of the House, before that order should become law. Mr. Gladstone admitted that this was a grave ques tion, which had a claim on their consideration when it be came necessary to deal with it. The order had been on the table only four days, and as twenty-five days had yet to elapse before it became law, he hoped the right hon. gentleman would be so kind as to communicate with him so that the subject might be discussed at a time that might be convenient,

In connection with the Bill to consolidate and amend the law relating to the property of married women, in relation to which a notice was given in the House of Commons by Mr. Hinde Palmer, Q.C., on the first day of the session, a deputation waited upon the Lord Chancellor on Tuesday at his private room in the House of Lords. The deputation consisted of Mr. Jacob Bright, M.P., Mr. Arthur Arnold, M.P., and Sir Arthur Hobhouse, and was introduced by Mr. Hinde Palaer. In the course of a prolonged interview, the provisions of the proposed measure were discussed. The Lord Chancellor expressed a desire for the opportunity of further considering the clauses of the measure, and promised that he would then consult with the promoters of the Bill as to its provisions and its progress in Parlia

ment.

CASES OF THE WEEK.

PRACTICE-OFFICIAL REFEREE-MOTION ΤΟ RESCIND DIRECTIONS-Cosrs.-In a case of Underhay v. Smith, before the Master of the Rolls on the 11th inst., a motion was made by the defendants to rescind certain directions given by the official referee as to the mode of ascertaining a loss in certain partnership accounts. The question involved the construction of the partnership articles, and was of some complexity, and eventually the Master of the Rolls rescinded the directions given. The defendants then asked for the costs of the motion, and the plaintiffs submitted that the costs should be made costs in the action, as in effect the motion was similar to a summons for the direction of the judge as to the mode of taking the accounts, and was for the benefit of all parties. JESSEL, M.R., however, held that a question of substance had been decided in the defendants' favour on appeal from the official referee; and he therefore gave the applicants the costs of the motion.-SOLICITORS, Law, Hussey, & Hulbert; Fladgate, Smith, & Fladgate.

PRACTICE

LEAVE TO SERVE NOTICE OF MOTION WITH THE WRIT-POWER OF CHIEF CLERK TO GRANT SAMEORDER IN CHAMBERS-DRAWING UP OF ORDER-RULES OF COURT, 1875, ord. 53, R. 8.-In a case of Conacher v. Conacher, also before the Master of the Rolls on the 11th inst., a motion was made for an injunction, and it appeared that leave to serve short notice of motion had purported to have been given by one of the chief clerks by his initialling an informal document applying for the same. An objection was taken that the motion could not be brought on, no proper leave having in fact, been given, as the chief clerk had no jurisdiction to give the same. By the notices issued as to the Christmas Vacation it is stated that "applications for leave to give short or other special notice of motion may be made at the chambers of the Vice-Chancellor Malins," and the notices then specify that the brief of counsel in case of urgency is to be sent to the judge. It appeared that the chief clerk's leave had not been drawn up as an order. JESSEL, M.R., was of opinion that the matter was entirely irregular, and that the chief clerk had no power, under ord. 53, r. 8, to give the leave. The proper way was for the brief of counsel to be sent to the judge in the usual way, and for the judge to make the order. If the order had been drawn up giving the leave, it would then have been a different thing, as such order, though made in chambers, was in form made by the judge, and no person could go behind the order. As no leave had been given to serve the notice, the motion must stand over, and no injunction could be granted that day.-SOLICITORS, Layton & Jaques: Van Sandau & Cumming.

OBITUARY.

MR. CHARLES DRUCE.

Mr. Charles Druce, solicitor (the head of the firm of Druce, Sons, & Jackson), of 10, Billiter-square, who was almost the oldest practising solicitor in London, died on the 10th inst., in his eighty-ninth year. Mr. Druce was the son of Mr. Charles Druce, solicitor, clerk to the Inn-Holders' Company, and was born in 1792. He was admitted a solicitor in 1814, and had practised for sixty-six years in Billitersquare. He was formerly in partnership with his father, and with his brother, Mr. John Druce, and more recently he was associated with his sons, Mr. Charles Claridge Druce, the vice-president of the Incorporated Law Society for the present year, and Mr. Al-xander Claridge Druce, who is now clerk to the Inn-Holders' Company and receiver of Dalwich College, and also with Mr. Arthur Jackson. Mr. Druce was solicitor to Dulwich College, and he had a very Large mercantile practice in the city of London. He was one of the oldest surviving members of the Incorporated Law Society, and was for many years a member of the committee of the Metropolitan and Provincial Law Association. Mr. George Druce, Q.C., of the Chancery bar, who was killed by a fall from his horse about twelve years ago, was the second son of the deceased.

LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL.

COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION. HILARY EDUCATIONAL TERM, 1881. Prospectus of the Lectures of the Professors.-The Professor of Roman Law will, during the ensuing educational term, deliver a course of twelve lectures on the Roman law of persons and family relations considered historically and compared with the English law. The first lecture will be delivered on Thursday, January 13, 1881, at 2.30 p.m. The subsequent lectures on the above subject will be delivered on Mondays and Thursdays at the same hour.

Equity.-The Professor of Equity will, during the ensuing educational term, deliver a course of twelve lectures upon "the conflict or variance between equity and common law, with reference to the same matters." The first lecture will be delivered on Wednesday, January 12, 1881, at 4.15 p.m., and the subsequent lectures at the same hour on Fridays and Wednesdays.

Law of Real and Personal Property.-The Professor of the Law of Real and Personal Property will deliver, during the ensuing educational term, twelve lectures, being "an introductory course on real property law, with special reference to tenures, estates, and the different modes of assurance of real property."

NOTE. This course is intended to be preparatory to a course of lectures on the law of "vendors and purchasers of real estate."

The first lecture will be delivered on Friday, January 14, 1881, at 3.5 p.m. The subsequent lectures will be delivered on Tuesdays at 4 p.m., and on Fridays at 3.5 p.m.

Common Law.-The Professor of Common Law will, during the ensuing educational term, deliver twelve lectures, being the first of three courses of lectures, on the principles of the law of torts. The first lecture will be delivered on Thursday, January 13, 1881, at 4.15 p.m. The subsequent lectures will be delivered on Mondays and Thursdays at the same hour.

NOTE. In December next there will be four examinations, one in the subject of the lectures given by each professor, open (subject as hereinafter mentioned) to all students who have during the year 1881 attended the lectures of any of the professors, but no student will be admitted to the examination in the subjects of the lectures of any professor unless he shall have attended at least two-thirds of the lectures given during the year by such professor. No student will be admitted to more than two examinations; and no student who shall have obtained a studentship will be admitted to any such examination.

After the examinations the following prizes will, on the recommendation of the committee, be given (that is to say) :—

To the students who shall have passed the best examination in the subjects of the lectures of each professor, first prize, £50; second prize, £25; third prize, £15; fourth prize, £10; and a first and second prize of £70 and £30, respectively, to the students who obtain the greatest aggregate number of marks in the examination in the subjects of the lectures given by any two of the professors.

No student will be entitled to more than one prize, but a student will receive the prize of the highest value to which he shall appear to be entitled.

The committee will not be obliged to recommend any of the above prizes to be awarded, if the result of the examination be such, as in their opinion, will not justify such recommendation.

UNIVERSITY OF LONDON. 1861.

FIRST LL.B. EXAMINATION.

PASS LIST.

First Division.

Bennett, Arthur Henry.-Private tuition.
Brown, Robert Weir.-Gray's Inn and private study.
Evans, John.-University College of Wales.
Harris, David Lewis.-Downing College, Cambridge.
Hoddinott, Benjamin, B.A.-Private study.
Holab, Arthur.-Private tuition.
Lithiby, John.-Private tuition.
Reinhardt, Walter Hope.-Private study.
Shaw, Marmaduke Spicer.-Private study.
Usher, Samuel Lawry.-Private study.
Wertheimer, John.-Private study.

Second Division.

Batten, John Dickson.-Trinity College, Cambridge.
Davis, Edward Pinder.-Private study.

Ensor, Frederick William. -Leys School, Cambridge, and
Jesus College, Oxford.

Hickman, Walter Richard John.-Private study.

Hussey-Walsh, Valentine John.-Private tuition.

Stevens, John Edward.-Private study.

Stevenson, George Frederick.-Private study.

Sugden, Robert John.-Private study.

Upjohn, Arthur Ritchie.-Private study.

White, George, B.A.-St. John's, Battersea, and Middle Temple.

SECOND LL.B. EXAMINATION.

First Division.

Barrs, Henry Hollier Hood.-Private study.

Lawrance, Hamilton Edward.-Private study.

Micklem, Nathaniel, B.A.-University College and private study.

Napier, Thomas Bateman.-Private study.
Robinson, Alfred.-Private study.

Upjohn, William Henry.-Gray's Inn.

Williams, Harry Montague.-Private study.

Second Division.

Alger, George Herbert.-Brighton College and private study.
Bloomer, Charles Edward.-Private study.
Cross, William Charles Henry.-Private study.
Daphne, Pasco.-Private study.

Oldfield, Herbert Rooke.-Private study.
Pope, Reginald Barrett.-Private study.

Sewell, John Thomas Beadsworth.-University College and private study.

Simmons, Samuel Mark, B.A.-Private study.

LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY.

At the quarterly meeting on January 11, Mr. C. E. Barry in the chair, Mr. Arthur James and Mr. W. St. Leonards Chubb were elected members of the society. Mr. F. T. Green was elected a member of the committee in the place of Mr. Spiers, elected to the office of reporter. The treasurer laid before the meeting a list of unpaid fines and subscriptions, and the secretary read a statement of the proceedings of the society during the preceding quarter. The remainder of the evening was taken up in the discussion of a motion brought forward by the treasurer for the establishment of a prize for an essay to be competed for by members of the society, but no resolution was come to on the subject. The following particulars are taken from the statement of the secretary above referred to. The quarter commenced on the 26th of October and terminated on the 14th of December, during which time the society held eight meetings, one of which was devoted to a debate with the United Law Students' Society. Twenty new members were elected, and three members had resigned. The average attendance at the meetings was twenty-seven, the highest number at any one meeting being thirty-six, and the lowest seventeen. The average number of speakers was nine, and of voters twenty.

THE UNITED LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. A meeting of this society was held at Clement's-inn, on Wednesday, the 12th inst., Mr. W. Dowson in the chair. After the transaction of private business, the subject of debate was opened by Mr. H. E. M. Donner in the negative, who was supported by Messrs. Foy, Wade, and KainsJackson, and opposed by Messrs. Maclaren, Acland, and Bartrum. The opener replied, and upon a division the motion on the paper was decided in the negative by a majority of four votes. The subject for debate on Wednesday, the 19th inst., will be: "That this meeting regards with satisfaction the measures proposed by the Government with reference to Ireland."

At the Central Criminal Court, on Monday, Mr. James Grayson, a solicitor, was tried on an indictment charging him with having committed wilful and corrupt perjury in affidavits sworn by him in some bankruptcy proceedings. The case eventually broke down, and a formal verdict of acquittal was taken.

LEGAL APPOINTMENTS.

Mr. ARTHUR CHALLINOR, solicitor, of Hanley, Uttoxeter, and Burslem, has been appointed Registrar of the Burslem County Court (Circuit No. 26). Mr. Challinor has been for some time deputy-registrar of the courts lately held at Han-ley, Burslem, and Tunstall. He was admitted a solicitor in 1875, and is also town clerk and clerk of the peace for the borough of Hanley.

Mr. HENRY WILLIAM CRIPPS, Q.C., has been elected Treasurer of the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple for the present year.

Sir HARDINGE STANLEY GIFFARD, Q.C., M.P., has been elected Treasurer of the Honourable Society of the Inner Temple for the present year.

Mr. WILLIAM JAMES HENRY, Solicitor (of the firm of Barnham & Henry), of Wellingborough, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for Northamptonshire for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women.

Mr. GEORGE LEADBETER WINGATE, of 8, Angel-court, Throgmorton-street, London, solicitor, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for taking Acknowledgments of Deeds to be executed by Married Women.

Mr. JOHN EDWARD WILKINS, barrister, has been appointed Secretary to the Royal Commission as to the Laws for the Measurement of Tonnage. Mr. Wilkins was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Hilary Term, 1854, and he is a member of the Northern Circuit.

DISSOLUTIONS OF PARTNERSHIPS. WALTER HORNBLOWER and TERTIUS JOHN HADLEY, solici tors, 28, Waterloo-street, Birmingham (Hornblower & Hadley). Jan. 1.

WILLIAM PERKINS and FRANCIS HENRY CANDY, solicitors, 6, Albion-terrace, Southampton (Wm. Perkins & Candy). Dec. 31. [Gazette, Jan. 7, 1881.]

COMPANIES.

WINDING-UP NOTICES.

JOINT STOCK COMPANIES.

LIMITED IN CHANCERY.

for

CITY OF BRUNSWICK TRAMWAYS COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented Jan 4, directed to be heard before Bacon,. V.C., on Jan 15. Terrell, Lombard, st, solicitor for the petitioner ECCLESHILL WORSTED MILL COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition winding up, presented Dec 22, directed to be heard before the M.R. on Jan 22. Paterson and Co, Lincoln's inn fields, agents for Gardiner and Jeffery, Bradford, solicitors for the petitioners GRAVESEND AND NORTH FLEET CO-OPERATIVE STORES. LIMITED.Petition for winding up presented Dec 20, directed to be heard before the M.R. on Jan 15. Crundall and Co, Cannon st, solicitors for the petitioners

LONDON AERATED AND MINERAL WATERS COMPANY, LIMITED.Petition for winding up, presented Jan 6, directed to be heard before the M.R. on Jan 15. Chinery and Co, Fenchurch st, solicitors for the petitioner

[Gazette, Jan. 7.] ;

UNLIMITED IN CHANCERY. PADSTOW TOTAL LOSS AND COLLISION ASSURANCE ASSOCIATION.Malins, V.C., has by an order dated Dec 16, appointed Wm Philp, Bodmin, to be official liquidator. Creditors are required, on or before Feb 10, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts and claims to the above. Feb 21 at 12 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims [Gazette, Jan. 11.]

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES DISSOLVED. BARKSTONE FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Sun Inn, Barkstone, Leicester. Jan 3 FENISCOWLES SUNDAY-SCHOOL SICK SOCIETY, Feniscowles, Lancaster. Jan 4 [Gazette, Jan. 7.]

FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Swan Inn, High st, Stony Stratford. Jan 6 [Gazette, Jan. 11.1

CREDITORS' CLAIMS.

CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. LAST DAY OF PROOF.

BARBER, GEORGE WILLIAM WHITEHEAD, Sclater st, Bethnal Green, Licensed Victualler. Feb 15. Barber v Barber, V.C. Hall. Byfield, Gracechurch st

BAUME, PIERRE JOSEPH CELESTIN, Canterbury rd, East Brixton.
Feb 14. Piquerez v Baume, V.C. Hall. James, Ely pl. Holborn
BOLTON, WILLIAM JOHN, Aberdeen, Lieut-Col R.A. Feb 7. Robbins
▾ Bolton, V.C. Malins. Robbins, Lincoln's inn fields
BELL, EDWARD SALE, Burland, Eastrington, York, Farmer. Feb
10. Bell v Bell, V.C. Hall. Rollit, Kingston-upon-Hull
CARTER, ZILLAH, Storrington, Sussex. Feb 1. Bird v Botting, V.C.
Hall. Mant, Storrington

CAVALIERO, HENRY LEOPOLD, Minories. Feb 1. Cavaliero v
Cavaliero, V.C. Hall. Carr and Co, Rood lane

CRAWLEY, THOMAS, Edgbaston, Birmingham, Gent. Jan 31. Lea ▾ Manton, V.C. Malins. Horton, Birmingham

DUNGER, HENRY, Swaffham, Norfolk, Gent. Jan 31. Dunger v Jones, V.C. Hall. Carew, Southampten st, Bloomsbury GRIMSDALE, HENRY, Parr st, New North rd, Gent. Jan 26. Grimsdale v Hyland, V.C. Bacon. Lane, Gresham st

GROOM, ADELAIDE, Guildford st, Russell sq. Jan 28. Groom v Groom, V.C. Hall. Durant, Guildhall chmbrs, Basinghall st HENRY WILLIAM GEORGE, Marquess of Anglesey. Albert mansions, Victoria st. Feb 17. Skinner v Marquess of Anglesey, V.C. Hall. Lowe, Temple gardens

LISTER, JOHN, Sunderland, Ship Owner. Feb 7. Davies v Lister, M.R. Bowey, Sunderland

MARSLAND, CHARLES, Stockport, Chester. Jan 31. Marsland v Thorp, V.C. Malins. Reddish, Stockport

Jan 29.

STAINTON, JOHN, Hamilton rd, Islington, Job Master. Jan 25. Stainton v Stainton, M. R. Mills, New sq, Lincoln's inn WEBE, JAMES, Bowmoor, Ilminster, Somerset, Baker. Webb v Webb, V.C. Malins. Baker, Ilminster YARDLEY, CHARLES ALBERT, Coburg pl. Bayswater, Blind Manu. facturer. Jan 24. Hudson v Yardley, V.C. Bacon. Andrew, Great James st, Bedford row [Gazette, Dec. 31.] HANCOCK, FREDERICK, Fenton, Stafford, Beerseller. Jan 31. Han. cock v Hancock, V.C. Hall. Tennant and Co, Hanley [Gazette, Jan. 4.]

BATTERHAM, ELIZABETH, King's Lynn. Feb 8. Partridge and Co, King's Lynn

BELLAS, Rev. THOMAS, Appleby. Jan 15. Heelis, Appleby BOYALL, RICHARD, Louth, Lincoln, Jeweller. Jan 20. Sharpley and Son, Louth

BUBBELL, CHARLES JAMES, Newport, Monmouth. Feb 12

CARTER, LYDIA, Sutton-in-Ashfield, Nottingham. Feb 28. Maltby, Mansfield

COCKBURN, Right Hon. Sir ALEXANDER JAMES EDMUND, Hertford st, Mayfair, Bart, G.C.B. March 1. Ranken-Ford, South sq, Gray's inn

CONTERARE, JOHN JAMES, Swansea, Slate Merchant. Feb 1. Donaghue, Swansea

CRICKETT, GEORGE BODMAN, Ashton-on-Mersey, Chester, Gent. Feb 3. Marlow and Dixon, Manchester

CUCKSON, THOMAS, Worksop, Nottingham, Retired Machine Maker. Feb 1. Coulson, Worksop

DORMER, JAMES HARRIS, Leamington Priors, Warwick, Gent. Feb 20. Field and Sons, Leamington

GRAHAM, GEORGE, Sussex gdns, Hyde park, Esq. Feb 10. Neish and Howell, Watling st

GRAY, WILLIAM, Eythorne, Kent, Farmer. Feb 28. Claris, Dover GRIST, WILLIAM, Mare st, Hackney, Confectioner. Feb 5. Harris, Moorgate st

GROVER, DANIEL, Sevenoaks, Builder. Feb 22. Palmer, Tonbridge GWILLIM, DANIEL, Beaufort, Monmouth, Grocer.

Beaufort

Jan 15. Price,

HARE, ROBERT, Northallerton, York, Bank Agent. Jan 20. Waistell, Northallerton

HODGSON, ROBERT, Westerdale Yarm, York, Farmer. Feb 1. Todd and Harrison, Hartlepool

JEWELL, RICHARD GREENWOOD, Harwich, Essex, Hotel Proprietor. Feb 1. Russell and Co, Old Jewry

LEVI, JOSEPH, Kilbur nPriory, Retired Merchant. Jan 31. Levirton, Bishopsgate st

LIVI, PHOBE, Whimple st, Plymouth. Jan 31.

gate st

LLOYD, SARAH, Llandudno, Carnarvon. Feb 7. Llandudno

Levirton, Bishops

Minshall and Co, LONG, THOMAS, Buckland, Dover, Gent. Feb 28. Claris, Dover MARCHANT, MARY ANNA PAOLA GIUSEPPA, Carlton hill, St. John's Wood. Jan 31. Arnold and Co, Carey st MARSHALL, JOSEPH, West Heslerton Hall, York, Esq. Feb 1. Simpson, New Malton

PAIN, STEPHEN MANSER, Hastings, Gent. Feb 28. Claris, Dover PRITCHARD, MATTHEW, Llangattock-juxta-Usk, Monmouth, Yeoman. March 15. Watkins, Pontypool

PYCROFT, ANNA, Reading, Berks. Feb 7. Fortune, Chancery lane READE, JOHN PAGE, Torquay, Esq. Feb 8. Minet and Co, New Broad st

SILTZER, JOHN HENRY DAVID, Queen's gate gdns, South Kensington,
Esq. Jan 30. Wordsworth and Co, Threadneedle st
STAMPER, THOMAS, Falsgrave, York, Gent. Feb 1. Simpson, New
Malton

STUART, DAVID, Tunbridge Wells, Licensed Victualler.
Cripps and Sons, Tunbridge Wells

Feb 14

STUBINGTON, RICHARD, Well st, Cripplegate, Shoe Manufacturer Feb 1. Wells, Paternoster row

TEASDALE, THOMAS, Dufton House, Westmoreland, Gent. Jan 15. Heelis, Appleby

VERNON, Rev. WILLIAM HARDY, Wootton, Bedford. Feb 1. Holt and Son, Russell sq

WAINWRIGHT, WILLIAM, Bardsley, Ashton-under-Lyne, Gardener.
Jan 19. Toy and Broadbent, Ashton-under-Lyne
WILLIAMS, GEORGE ARTHUR, Cheltenham, Bookseller.
Wheeler, Cheltenham

July 1. [Gazette, Dec. 21. ATKINSON, ALICE, Felling, Durham. Feb 1. Harle and Co, Newcastle-on-Tyne

BEAVIS, JOHN, Winchester, Builder. Jan 14.
Winchester

Adams and Co,

BLYTH, MATILDA, Colchester, Essex. Feb 22. Howard and Co, Colchester

BRADBURY, THOMAS SWANWICK, Cheltenham, Gent. Jan 29. Gale, Cheltenham

CLARK, EDWARD, Thornley Colliery, Durham, Butcher. Feb 28. Stokoe, Sunderland

COMPTON, CHARLES, Bracknell, Berks, Coach Builder. Jan 30. Rooke and Son, Bedford row

EVANS, JOHN LEWIS, Llandyssal, Cardigan, Corn Merchant. Jan 31. Williams, Llandilo

FOGDEN, EDMUND, Appledram, Sussex, Farmer. Feb 3. Sowton, Chichester

GLOVER, ELIZA, Lower Tooting, Ironmonger. Jan 30. Stoneham and Legge, Philpot lane Feb 3.

GOLDING, WILLIAM, Albany st, Regent's park, Chemist. Toller and Sons, Doctors' Commons

HENDERSON, Rev. WILLIAM LAWES, Shepherd's Bush. Hardisty and Rhodes, Great Marlborough st

Feb 1.

HINTZ, ALEXANDER, Langford pl, St. John's Wood. Feb 7. Hollams and Co, Mincing lane

HUBBLE, WILLIAM, St. Leonard's-on-Sea, Gent. Feb 1. Hicks and Arnold, Wellington st. Strand

KETTELWELL, ADAM STUART, Brunswick sq, Camberwell, Shipbroker. Feb 1. Plews and Co, Mark lane

LOCKYER, GEORGE, sen., Deptford, Kent, Chemist. Feb 7. Lockyer, Deptford

LOWE, EDWARD WILLIAM DELANCY, Upper Berkeley st, Major-Gen., C.B. Feb 1. Taylor and Co, Bedford row

MARSHALL, JOHN, Tweedmouth, Beewick-upon-Tweed, Farmer. Jan 31. Douglas, Berwick-upon-Tweed

MCWHAN, ROBERT, Tranmere, Cheshire, Gent. Jan 23. Forrest, Liverpool

SCARSBROOK, MARY, Deddington, Oxford. Feb 1. Faulkner and Coggins, Deddington

SHEPHERD, PHILLIP CAMP, Lower Sutton, Devon, Yeoman. Feb 3.
Lidstone, Kingsbridge

SINCLAIR, CHARLOTTE ANN, Balham park rd, Balham.
Taylor and Co, Bedford row

Feb 1.

SMITH, WILLIAM CANNON, St. Albans, Hertford, Gent. Jan 17. Wells, St. Albans

STEPHENS, JOHN, Osborn st, Whitechapel. Botanic Druggist. Jan 31. Lockyer, Deptford

SWAINE, WILLIAM EDWARD, Guildford. Feb 10. Milne and Co,
Harcourt bldngs, Temple

WEST, JULIE ANTOINETTE, Pau, France.
Co, Oxford st

Feb 28. Burgoynes and [Gazette, Dec. 28.]

HUTCHINGS, HENRY BURDON, Young, New South Wales, Civil Engineer. Jan 31. Piercy and Hutchings, Bournemouth KEEPING, CHARLES, Wirtemburg st, Clapham, Doorkeeper, House of Lords. Feb 4. Yeilding, Great George st

LEES, JAMES, Hope-within-Pendleton, Manchester, Gent. March 1. Wood and Co, Manchester

ELOYD, THOMAS, Kidderminster, Worcester, Gent. Feb 1. Talbot, Kidderminster

PECK, WILLIAM, Camden Town, Esq. Feb 28. Shepheard and Sons, Finsbury circus

PUDDY, JOHN, Wembdon, Somerset, Gent. Feb 2. Poole, Bridg