Page images

bank, but stopped payment on the 1st of March, 1880, and England, and a petition was presented asking for the appointwent into voluntary liquidation. Claims were niade upon ment of a new trustee in the place of the brother, who was the purchasing bank for the balance of the purchase-money, still permanently resident in Australia. Fry, J., held, upon and upon the vending badk for a rescission of the agreement the authority of In re Bignold (20 W. R. 345, L. R. 7 Ch. for sale, and damages, and eventually an agreement for the 223), that he could appoint a new trustee and make a compromise of such claims upon the terms of a call being vesting order without service of the petition on the trustee made on the shareholders in the vendicg bank, and of certain | who was out of jurisdiction. This appears to go somewhat mutual payments, and for the carryiog out of the selling further than In re Bignold, inasmuch as there the trustee, agreement, was come to between the two companies, subject when appointed, was residing in England, but had after. to its sapction by special resolutions of the two companies wards gone to reside abroad, whereas in In re Carter the and by the court. A call was proposed to be made accord trustee was still residing in the place in which he was ingly upon Jameson, and he required the liquidators making residing at the time of his appointment. — SOLICITORS, such call to place his payment and that of the other Robinson, Son, & Edmonds. dissenting sharebolders to a special account, so as to be applied secondarily to that of the assenting members in

ACTION OF DECEIT—ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD-JUDICATURE satisfaction of the debts and liabilities of the vending com.

| Act.-In a case of Redgrave v. Hurd, before Fry, J., on the pany. On the refusal of the liquidators of the vending bank

14th ipst., the question was raised whether, since the to place Jameson's name, and that of the other dissenting

Judicature Act, it is necessary that, when an action is based members, in a separate list, he now moved against the liqui

upon fraud or misrepresentation, the specific misrepresentadators of the vending bank that it might be declared that,

tions intended to be relied upon should be distinctly alleged a between the assenting and dissenting members, the assent

in the pleadings. Reference was made to the case of ing members were primarily liable to the extent of the

Arkwright v. Newbold, recently before the Court of Appeal amounts unpaid on their sbares for the payment of the debts

(ante, p. 333), in wbich the same point was raised, though it and liabilities of the company, and that no call should be

became unnecessary to decide it. It was stated that in that made upon the dissenting members until the liability of the

case James, L.J., in answer to an observation made by assepting members had been exhausted, and that it might be

counsel, that some persons thought that pleadings should declared that the dissenting members were not liable for the

be abolisbed, said that no one, he believed, had proposed that costs of the winding up or for any costs or liabilities in

pleadings should be abolished in an action of this kind, and curred by reason of the transfer to the purcbasing company. intimated his opinion, as did also Cotton, L.J., that in such Petitions are pending to approve the agreements of compro

an action the allegations of fraud should be specific. It bemise, and it was asked that the motion and petitions might

came, in the result, equally unnecessary in Redgrave y. come on together, but on the Master of the Rolls declining Hurd to decide the point, and indeed counsel on both sides to accede to this course two points were argued ; first, admitted that the Judicature Act had made no difference. whether the selling agreement was witbin the powers of But FRY, J., said that it had always beenhis opinion that the vending company independently of the Companies Act; the Judicature Act could not affect the question. He and, secondly, wbether it was within the 161st section thought it was only fair play between man and man that of the Act. By article 93, sub-section 9, of the articles wben charges of fraud were made the person charged should of association of the Union Bank, the board might, know what were the specific charges made against him.subject to the assent of the company by special resola SOLICITORS, John Holder ; R. Biale. tion, “amalgamate with, sell, and transfer all or any part of its business," and might enter into the necessary deeds, agreements, and contracts, and the board was empowered to FORCIBLE ENTRY-EJECTMENT OF TENANT-INJURY TO do all such acts as might be necessary or expedient to carry FURNITURE—5 Rich. 2, stat. 1, c. 8.-In a case of Beddall out such purchases and transfers. JESSEL, M.R., was of v. Maitland, before Fry, J., on the 8th inst., the question arose opinion that the selling agreement was not authorized by whether damages could be recovered for the forcible entry article 93. The word “business” he thought might be lett | upon, and ejectment of, a tenant from a house, and injury to be interpreted by the company, and without straining the done to his furniture. The defendant had occupied a house word arrears of calls might very well be included. The as tenant at will to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff had given word “sell” prima jacie meant a sale for cash, and the him notice to quit. The defendant, by his counter-claim,company could not sell for such consideration as might be alleged that the plaintiff bad uplawfully, and by force, broken agreed upon. The sale was in effect in consideration of into, and ejected the defendant from, the house, and shares in the purchasing company, and no majority could violently put him and his family out of the house, and also bind a minority under the articles to carry out a sale in that violently and recklessly thrown thereout, and damaged his manner. It was plain to his mind that the sale could only goods and effects. And the defendant claimed damages in be carried out by a winding up under the Act, and in fact respect of these alleged injuries. The evidence showed that this was the opinion of the board, as they passed a resolution an agent of the plaintiff, and some men employed by him, had for a voluntary winding op, and the appointment of broken in the door of the house, and bad tarned out the liquidators. As to the question whether the agreement was defendant's furniture. Fry, J., said that the result of the within the 161st section of the Companies Act, he thought statute of Richard 2 was that a man who was in possession of the case was within that of In re City and County Investment property might use force to keep out a trespasser ; but, if a Company (L. R. 13 Ch. D. 475), wbere the Appeal Court trespasser had got into possession, the rightful owner could (including himsell) had decided tbat the section did authorize not use force to turn him out, but must appeal to the law. such an arrangement as the present. Another point had The result appeared to his lordsbip to be this, that as the been mentioned, as to whether the agreement was within the defendant's possession was unlawful, he could recover no power of the purchasing company, and be should not now damages for the forcible entry. He could recover no damages express an opinion upon that question until that company for the entry, because he was not in rightful possession, and bad been heard upon the point, but would merely direct tbebe could recover no damages for the forcible entry, because rest of the motion to be disposed of after the petitions had the statute of Richard 2 made forcible entry a crime, but did been heard.-SOLICITORS, Parkers; Cunliffe, Beaumont, & | not give any civil remedy for it. But, in respect of other Davenport.

independent acts done in the course of, or after the forcible

entry, an action would lie, because the possession which was APPOINTMENT OF New TRUSTEE_VESTING ORDER

acquired by force was made unlawful by the statute, and TRUSTEE OUT OF JURISDICTION—TRUSTEE ACT, 1850, s. 32.

the person who had thus acquired possession could not, in -In a case of In re Carter, before Fry, J., on the 11th inst.,

answer to the claim for damages, plead a lawful possession.

This bis lordship thought was the result of the anthorities. a question arose as to tbe appointment of a new trustee of a

Thus in Newton v. Harland (1 Scott N. S. 474), the plaintiff settlement in the place of a trustee who was residing out of the jurisdiction. The settlement was of real estate in

recovered damages for injuries done to his wife by the defendEngland. It was execnted upon a marriage in Australia, the

ant in turning her out of a house after a forcible entry by the husband and wife and the other beneficiaries, who were the

defendant, while in Pollen v. Brewer (7 C. B. N. S. 371), it children of the husband by a former marriage, being then

was held that no damages could be recovered for a forcible resident in Australia. The trustees were the husband and a

| eviction itself.-SOLICITORS, F. C. Tudor; E. Johnson. rother of his, who was also resident in Australia. After. wards all the beneficiaries came to reside permanently in

DIVORCE-AFFIDAVIT VERIFYING PETITION-ABSENCE OF that independent valuers (Messrs. Phillips & Son) should be PETITIONER-AFFIDAVIT BY SOLICITOR. - In the Probate, appointed, and, about the third week in pril, a valuation Divorce, and Admiralty Division on the 15th inst., in was made by them, and, by arrangement, sifarniture was Bruce v. Bruce and Laing, a novel point of practice was raised. delivered at a house Mr. Beddall bad taken on lease for the The petitioner in a suit for dissolution of marriage, is an | purpose. Some little delay occurred, in consequence of officer in the army, and is at present stationed at Candahar. the illness of the bankrupt's son, and on the 26th of April, Ao application was now made on his behalf to dispense with before any of the furniture was removed, Mr. Beddall paid him his affidavit verifying the petition under rule 2, on the ground the sum of £100 on account of the valuation, and the balance that there is at Candahar no British consul or other person of £332 on the 1st of May. The furniture was finally deharing authority to take affidavits, and no notary public. livered on the 5th of May, and Mr. Beddall thereupon HANXEX, P., said that he would, under the circumstances, signed an agreement to let the house furnished to the bank. allow the petition to be verified by the petitioner's solicitor, rupt's wife, and possession was subsequently given to her and would dispense with an affidavit from the petitioner thereunder. himself until he was in a position to be sworn.-SOLICITORS, On the 3rd of May, the bankrapt, in accordance with the Hollams, Son, d: Coward.

arrangement, paid Mr. Beddall the sum of $118 148., the balance of a debt due to him, and, on the 6th of May,

$100 further, on account of fees. CASES BEFORE THE BANKRUPTCY

On tbe 13th of April, 1880, a debtor's summons was

issued against the bankrupt at the suit of Evans, and on the REGISTRARS.

18th of June the adjudication took place. On the 8th of (Before Mr. REGISTRAR Pepes, acting as Chief Judge). July, the order of adjudication was discharged by the Court Feb. 15, 22; March 1.-Ex parte Barker and another, of Appeal, and, on the 2nd of August, Rogers was finally adRe Rogers.

judicated bankrupt. R., & solicitor, being pressed by Stock Exchange creditors,

J. Linklater, in support of the application.--The transsold his bousehold furniture, after valuation by an independent

action is void either as an act of bankruptoy or as a valuer, to B., & barrister, for the sum of $432, upon the condi

fraudulent preference. It is a sale by a hopeless insolvent tion that R. should, out of the purchase-money, repay B. an old for the purpose of defeating his Stock Exchange creditors, debt of £118, and £100 on account of professional fees. This and the evidence shows this to be tbe avowed object transaction occurred more than three months before R. became of the transaction. A sale of part of a debtor's property a bankrupt.

may come within the provisions of the statute as & Held, that the trustees under Ri's adjudication could not re

fraudulent transfer : Smith's Mercantile Law, 8th ed., cover the furniture or the two sums paid to B., on the ground that the transaction constituted either an act of bankruptcy or a

575, and cases there oited. In Lee v. Hart (10 Ex. 479), fraudulent preference.

Wightman, J., said, “The statuts does not mention sales

as one of the fraudulent modes by wbich an act of bank. This was an application on behalf of C. M. Barker and

raptoy may be committed, but a sale of goods at a low another, the trustees under the bankruptcy of Mr. William

rate may be a fraudalent transfer if the seller did not Rogers, solicitor, Essex-street, Strand, for a declaration that

intend to sell the gouds bonâ fide for the purpose of carrying an alleged purchase of the bankrupt's furniture by Mr.

on his business, but for the purpose of defeating and de. Augustus Beddall, and two payments made to him by the

laying creditors, and the purobaser bas reason to know that bankrupt, were fraudulent and void.

sooh is the object of the seller." The sale is therefore The bankrupt had employed Mr. Evans, a stock-broker,

bad. Young v. Waud (22 L. J. Ex. 27) shows that an to bny and sell stocks and shares for him, and he became

assignment may be frandalent if creditors are necessarily indebted to Mr. Evans in £3,544. On the 19th of Marcb, 1880, Messrs. Travers-Smith & Braithwaite, the solicitors

delayed, and that result has been contemplated : Harwood

v. Bartlett (6 Bing. N. C. 61); Fraser v. Levy (6 A. & N. 16). for Mr. Evans, wrote to the bankrupt for payment of the

In the latter case Channell, B., held that if a trader turned amount, and on the 1st of April, a demand to ground a

his goods into money with intent to take them out of the debtor's summons was signed and posted. About the middle of March, the bankrupt informed Mr.

reach of his creditors, and the buyer knew it, the sale was Beddall, a barrister with whom he had been upon terms of

invalid. The transaction is a scheme to prefer the intimate friendship for many years, that he had been specu.

respondent, as well as a fraudulent sale: Ex parte Pearson lating heavily on the Stock Exchange, and had lost several

(21 W. R. 688, L. R. 8 Ch. App. 667); Ex parte Halliday thoosands of pounds, which he was wholly unable to pay.

(21 W. R. 348, L. R. 8 Ch. App. 283). He also cited He further stated that he had, by meeting previous losses,

Singleton v. Butler (2 Bos. & P. 283); Re Wright (L. R. 3 so exhausted all his ready money, that it was imperatively

Ch. D. 70); Tomkins . Saffrey (L. R. 3 H. L. App. Decessary for him to raise funds to meet his current expenses.

Cas. 213). The bankrupt was then in debt to the extent of about E. C. Willis, for the respondent. The transaction com£15,000, with assets £60 or £70, besides book debts amount. | plained of occurred more than three months before the ading to £1,200, and his furniture. Mr. Beddall stated, how. judication, and cannot therefore be a fraudulent preference: ever, that the bankrupt did not inform him of tbe extent of section 92. To ask for the furniture and the money too is his indebtedness, and, apart from his Stock Exchange losses, to ask the court to commit a fraud upon the respondent. be had no idea, until after the adjudication, that he owed There was no invitation by the bankrupt to the respondent more than a few hundred pounds.

to take possession of the furniture; the bankrupt did Mr. Beddall advised the bankrupt, as his friend, to sell not go to him with a view to the particular arrangement his forniture, and go into lodgings, which he at once acceded which was carried out. Harwood v. Bartlett and Frazer v. to, and the bankrupt's wife inspected some apartments ac Levy are distinguishable. In Young v. Waud the debtor cordingly. It was found, however, that the rent of such had absconded, and in Lee v. Hart circumstances occurred lodgings as the bankrupt required would amount to so large which really amounted to a conspiracy to defraud creditors a som as to render it impossible to adopt that course, Mr. who had supplied goods. There is no authority to show Beddall then advised him to obtain an advance upon a bill that a person in difficulties may not dispose of goods for of sale of his furniture, and at once take a smaller house. The their full value ; and a wide difference exists between a sale bankrapt agreed to do this, and subsequently showed Mr. of part of the debtor's property and the whole. There is Beddall the prospectuses of a number of loan societies, from no evidence that the information as to the bankrupt's posi. which it appeared that the interest charged was so tion was given from any fraudulent motive. Suppose the large as to render that course also impracticable. As goods had been sold to a stranger, could the transaction have money was, however, urgently required by the bankrupt, been impeached? In Robson on Bankruptcy, 3rd ed., at p. Mr. Beddall eventually made this proposition to him : that 132, it is said, “The true principle applicable to cases of he would purchase his furniture out and out, at a price to be this kind seems to be that if the transaction is bonâ fide, aod fixed by a competent valuer, and would hire a house, which does not involve consequences injurious to the debtor's he would let to the bankrupt's wife at a fair rent, but upon solvency, it will not be an act of bankruptcy; but tbat, on the condition that, out of the purchase-money, he should the other hand, if the circumstances of the debtor and tbe repay the balance of a debt he owed Mr. Beddall, and give nature of the security are such'that the necessary result of bim a cheque for at least 100 on account of professional fees the latter, if carried into effect, must be to render bim then due, amounting to between £300 and £400.

hopelessly insolvent, or, in the case of a trader, lo disable The bankrupt having accepted the proposal, it was agreed him from carrying on his business, it will be an act of


bankruptcy.” In the present case the sale was of the bank. | not included in the consideration. Then it is said it, the rupt's bousehold furniture only, and the transaction in no transaction, is fraudulent because no pressure was put upon way interfered with the carrying on of his business. He the debtor. But in Tomkins v. Saffery the debtor went also cited Ex parte Topham (21 W. R. 655, L. R. 8 Ch. App. voluntarily to the Stock Exchange creditors, and made a 614); Ex parte Tempest (19 W. R, 137, L. R, 6 Ch. App. voluntary cession on his part, and, therefore, it was fraudu

lent under the Act. But there does not appear to be any Mr. REGISTRAR PEPYs, after stating the nature of the

voluntary preference in this case on the part of the debtor,

such as existed in Tomkins v. Saffery. It is not as if he had application, said: The bankrupt, who it appears was

gone to Mr. Beddall and said, “How much will you take ?" hopelessly involved in transaetions on the Stock Exchange, in the month of March last, goes to his friend

and had paid what he demanded of him in the first instance. Mr. Beddall, who is an old friend of his, they baving

On the contrary, he simply went and consulted him as to

whether he could assist him or not, and the actual transacbeen clerks together in a solicitor's office, to ask his ad

tion was to make a distinct arrangement that something vice as to what to do under the circumstances. He was tben hopelessly pressed by Stock Exchange creditors, and

should be done, and it resulted in a bargain upon one side

and the other. It therefore appears to me that the case of he had incurred other debts, especially one to Mr. Sims, from whom he had borrowed money for former transactions.

Tomkins v. Saffery does not apply. Then, apart from He had very little assets at his bank, consisting merely of

| general considerations as to whether this was a fraudulent a sum of £60 or £70, book debts amounting to £1,200,

| preference of one creditor over the others which is void

against the trustees, I have to consider whether it was an act and also his furniture. The first advice Mr. Beddall seems to have given to him was that he should raise

of bankruptcy. It was very atly put to me, and no doubt

it seems at first sight, that these two astute lawyers laid their money on his forniture on a bill of sale, and in that

heads together to defeat the Stock Exchange creditors, who are way stave off the evil day. But this, on consideration,

left out in the cold, and, therefore, that the transfer was a appeared impracticable on account of the exorbitant terms

fraud. But, when I come to look at the transactions, step exacted by loan companies dealing with persons in difficulties;

by step, which I have done very carefully, I must consider and another reason was that the transaction appeared on the

in what particular point it can be held to be void against the whole to be too risky. However that may be, for some reason

trustee. "Now, as Mr. Willis put it in the course of the or other that idea was given up, and then Mr. Beddall said to

argument, “Suppose there had been a sale, and a stranger Mr. Rogers, “If you cannot do it any other way, I am

had bought the furniture, could it have been impeached ?” willing, in consideration of our old friendship, to buy the

I think clearly not. Supposing I go one step further, and furniture of you at a valuation, to be determined by an

suppose there had been a sale of the furniture to a friend of independent person, and, baving so bought the furniture, I

the bankrupt; does that alter the case ? Dous the fact of will lease a house into which I will place it in which you and

making himself a party to the transaction, so far as regards your family can reside, no extra rent being charged for the

hiring a house for his friend, alter it if the transaction be in use of the furniture. For this, you shall pay me the old

itself bona fide ? Surely he could do as he liked in this redebt you owe me of £118, and you shall also pay me on

spect. If he chose to let a house to the bankrupt he could account of certain professional fees I have earned in your

| do so, or if, out of consideration for his friend, he took lodg. service £100 more, which you can pay out of the proceeds of

ings in order that he might have payment of the debt, would the furniture.” This agreement is ratified, and the transac

that shake the case? It appears to me that it would not, and tion goes on. Some little time elapses before it is carried out,

this being altogether out of the purview of the Act, it was in consequence of the illness of one of the bankrupt's children,

quite competent to him to make the arrangement, because so but in April the furniture is valued by an independent valuer at £432. Of this, £100 is paid to Mr. Beddali,

long as the bankruptcy did not take place within three

months, he might have given any preference he liked, and I reducing the amount to £332, and ultimately the furniture is

do not think anything could bave been done to prevent him. sold, and the whole arrangement carried out, a house being

It appears to me, therefore, after looking very carefully into taken for the wife, and £118 paid to Mr. Beddall in con

the matter, that there is no one ground upon which the sideration of his part of the transaction. Up to this time no

transaction can be impeached. It appears to be of the nature act of bankruptcy had been committed, but on the 7th of May

of a transfer of property in consideration partly of a present a debtor's summons is issued, an act of bankruptcy established,

advance, and partly of a past debt, and, as such, cannot be and ultimately adjudication takes place. The first observation which I have to make upon this transaction is thut it

impeached. I think, therefore, that the present application

fails, and it must be dismissed, with costs. must be taken entirely as one transaction. I was asked to look upon it as if originally a sale of the furniture took place

Solicitors for the trustees, Travers-Smith & Braithwaite.

Solicitors for the respondent, Harris & Powell, by Rogers to Beddall, and that the money was simply considered lost by Rogers, and that subsequently he made a voluntary payment to Beddall, but that view cannot be sustained. I think the whole must be considered one transaction, and a regular bargain between them that “You

SOCIETIES. sball do so and so, and I will do so and so," the whole thing being arranged between these two gentlemen, who are both clever lawyers, and who knew very well that they must be

EQUITY AND LAW LIFE ASSURANCE careful. The whole arrangement must be looked upon as

SOCIETY. one, and, although the actual payment to Mr. Beddall was The annval generel meeting of this society was held on not made until after the act of bankruptcy, still I feel bound Tuesday last at the offices, No. 18, Lincoln's-inn-fields, to hold that altogether the transaction took place in March, W.C.; Mr. John M. Clabon, the chairman, presiding. more than three months before the bankruptcy, and therefore Mr. G. W. BERRIDGE (the actuary and secretary) having the 92nd section does not apply.

read the notice convening the meeting, the report was taken It remains now to consider whether it is a fraudulent as read. transfer of part of the bankrupt's estate under the 6th The CHAIRMAN said: It is a great many years since I section (2nd sub-section), and, therefore, an act of bank. became a director of this society-I think more than twenty. ruptcy. Many cases were cited to me in the course of the ar five years ago-and I am certain, if my memory serves me, gument for the trustees, and great stress was laid upon the case that there has not been one year in which we have not had of Tomkins v. Saffery. I have looked very carefully through a good account to give you-in which we have not had & that case, and have read the judgment of their lordships, but plentiful accession of business and made the most careful it does not appear to me that the case is at all upon all fours selection of our lives, as shown by the fact that the actual with the present. There were two grounds in that case for | deaths are so much less than the expectation; and in which setting aside the transaction as a fraud against the trastee. we bave not dealt carefully in investing the money of the One was that there had been a cessio bonorum, a giving up of society. The report will have given you many figures which the whole of the property of the bankrupt, and a fraud under you used not to have; but still I think I may with advantage the Bankruptcy Act. Now, in this case, there has been no recall to your memory a few figures which may show you cessio bonorum, no giving up of the whole of the property of the what I have said as to our uninterrupted prosperity. I shall bankrupt. The bankrupt parts with the furniture, but the begin with the figure of the funds in hand, because I think book debts which would be worth some hundreds of pounds, l entries hardly give us that idea of the large amount of our although they might not be immediately realizable, were funds, and particularly as a recent valuation of oar liabili.

[ocr errors]

ties shows the very prosperous condition of our society; obairman will have something to say to you presently on and I begin with that for another reason, for I remember the subject of our investments. I consider that we are that when I first became a director the funds in hand were very fortunate in being able to make the investments we £130,000. In abstracting these figures from old papers, I have made, because you know what increasing difficulty find that at the end of 1869 the £130,000 bad increased to there is in getting good investments paying a good rate of $736,000; at the end of 1874 they had increased to interest. To show you how much we have to put out, I £1,104,000; at the end of 1879 they had increased to will tell you there has been paid off during the year £1,610,000; and at tbe end of last year, only one year £176,000, and that is all being invested again in the same more, they were £1,670,000. I may remind you that olass of securities' whiob you see in the balance-sheet. during the last year the bonus was declared, and we After some further observations the Chairman concluded have in point of faot paid to those persons who desired to by saying :-Having made these general observations, I bare their bonus in cash £35,000. We should have think I am justified in saying that I have proved to you therefore bad that sum in hand at the end of last year the three things I said in the beginning-We have an bad it not been for this payment. The number of annual accession of good business; we make a most careful policies at the end of 1864 was 1,756; at the end of 1869, selection of our lives ; and we put out the money we have 2,190; at the end of 1874, 2,536 ; at the end of 1879, at the best and safest profit. I move the adoption of the 2,847. You will observe the progressive and regular in- report. crease-I am giving the total, and not the net basiness, Mr. H. Fox BRISTOWE, Q.C., seconded the adoption of and I will now give the same figures as to the the report, and referred to several items in the accounts. 3mount assured. At the end of 1864 we had With respect to tho reversions, the average profit realized £2.178,000 insured ; at the end of 1869, £3,217,000 : at from these in the three last quinquenniams was 9 per the end of 1874, £4,015, 000, and at the end of 1879 cent., showing that this business paid nearly double the £4,928,000, 80 we bave advanced in fifteen years consider average rate of interest of the general investments. The ably more than double. The next set of figures I will other assets were exaotly such as a society like this should give you are the total annual premiums at the end of possegg. each period. In 1869 they were £95,000 odd ; in 1874, Mr. EILOART called attention to several items. He £120,000 odd, and in 1879, £148,000 odd. I did not wished to know whether there was any idea of making the begin with the figures of 1864, because they are not reserve fund or insurance fund proportional to the amount convenient, but of course they are double, as well as insured. The amount insured in 1874 was £4,000,000; in the amount assured. The next favourable point I may men 1879, $4,900,000, with an increase at the end of the five tion is the large average amount we have on each life, be- years of £913,000. The sands in 1874 were £1,104,000, cause it is a well-established fact that the lives of the higher and in 1879 £1,610,000, 80 that they had an increase of are better than those of the lower orders, for as you go up in £506,000 of funds to set against an increased amount the scale of society people are better fed and better clothed. | insured of £913,000, being more than 50 per cent. Now Now, in the quinquennium ending December, 1864, the were they to go on adding to the reserve to meet the sam Average was £1,440; and in the quinquennium ending 1869 insured, something like 50 per cent. of the amount ? the average was £1,777. I beve not the figures for the two The CHAIRMAN said that the funds went on increasing next quinquenniums, but in the last year the average was year by year, there being more received in premiums than £1,980, so tbat we have been progressively getting a class of was paid. Mr. Berridge made a valuation of the liabili. lives which, according to admitted facts, are of a better class. ties, and when he found they had a sum in excess of what Then I have another set of figures—the average annual they were liable for, be advised the board that it might be amount insured during the periods of five years. The average fairly divided. The female lives had lived longer than annual amount during the quinquennium ending 1869 was they anticipated, but the males lived a shorter time, but £347,000; in the next quinquennium ending 1874 it was the two about balanced. Any office wbich during the last nearly the sameviz., £348,000; and in the quin- | few years had kept up its business—and this office had quennium ending 1879, £398,000. Now it is one of actually increased theirs—must be considered to have done the strongest evidences of prosperity that we have cided

well. over this certain period, which is always the difficulty of

The resolution was then put to the meeting and carried an office. Our new business continues to increase largely, | and when an office tides over the period of difficulty, which Mr. Boodle next proposed the re-election of the retiring is generally from twenty-five to thirty years from its com- directorg, Messrg. Kay, Kensit, Russell, and Powell. mencement, and the new business continues to increase, it is, Mr. WALMIESLEY seconded the resolution, whioh was as it were, on a basis of certain prosperity. The next set of

agreed to. . figures I will give you, which I have already referred to

The auditors, Messrs. Boodle and Valpy, were also regenerally, relate to the carefulness with which lives are selected. Mr. Berridge tells me that on the average during


The remuneration to the directors and auditors was the quinquennium ending in 1869, the excess of the expected

fixed, and cordial votes of thanks panged to the chairman claim over the actual claim was £16,000 ; in the next quin

and directors and to Mr. Berridge and the staff. quennium it was £16,000 again, and in the last quioquennium it was £22,000; and he tells me that during the

The meeting then separated. last year it is about £18,000 ; and whereas the expectation es to life would have been that thirty-six would have died, in respect of which deaths we should have paid £93,000, only twenty-four died, in respect of which we have paid $74,600; LEGAL APPOINTMENTS. *€o that in every single particular which I have given you there has been a regular increase of prosperity. Now I will Mr. LEWIS WILLIAM CAVE, Q.C., who has been apgive you the last two years, and comparing them only I find

pointed a Judge of the Queen's Bench Division, in succes. : that the amount insured in 1879 was £303, 181, the premiums sion to Sir Henry Mather Jackson, deceased, is the eldest

being £9,605. In 1880 it was £299,000—a few pounds son of the late Mr. William Cave, of Deborough, Northless-the premiums being £10,175, the sun insured

amptonshire, and was born in 1833. He was educated at being something less and the premiums being a little Rugby, and was formerly scholar of Lincoln College, more. The next head I will give you is that of assets, Oxford, where he graduated second class. in classics in and I hope you will agree with me, wben you look down 1856. He was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in the list of assets that we give you in the balance-sheet, Trinity Term, 1859, having in the previous month obtained 1 tbat we stand in a good and sound positiun. There is no a first-class certificate of honour. He was for several

one asset to which apy objection can be made. I may tell years a revising barrister, and became a Queen's Counsel sou that during the last year there is an actual increase in .in 1875. He formerly practised on the Midland Circuit, the assets of $56,000. It would have been about £100,000, but since the last arrangement of the agsizes he bad become but we have paid £35,000 for our cash bonus, and this is a member of the North-Eastern Circuit. Mr. Justice Cave the way in which we have dealt with that £56,000. We published in conjunction with the Hon. Edward Chandos have put ont on mortgages £3,000; loans on policies, Leigh) a volume of Criminal Reports, and he has also £1,500; on preference stocks, £30,000; on reversions, | edited' “ Addison on Torts,” and “Addison on Contracts.' £16,000 ; on deposit, £20,000. I think our depnty. He has been recorder of the city of Lincoln since 1873,

[ocr errors]

and is a bencher of the Inner Temple. He recently pre. | take Acknowledgments of Deeds and to administer Oaths for sided over the Commission to inquire into the existence New York, United States. of Corrapt Practices in the City of Oxford.

Mr. WILLIAM SMITH, solicitor (of the form of W. Smith & Mr. EDWARD HARRY ADCOCK, solicitor (of the firm of Son), of Sheffield, bas been elected President of the Sheffield Starkey & Adcock), of 19, Palmerston-buildings, Old Broad District Incorporated Law Society for the ensuing year. Mr. street, and Penge, has been appointed a Perpetual Com. Smith was admitted a solicitor in 1844, and he is in partner. missioner for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by ship with his son, Mr. Charles Henry Smith. He is vice. Married Women for the Counties of Middlesex and consul at Sheffield for France and Italy, and clerk to the Surrey, and the Cities of London and Westminster,

West Riding magistrates at Sheffield. His firm are solicitors

to the Sheffield School Board. Mr. Smith is also one of the Mr. WILLIAM OSBORN BOYes, solicitor, of Barnet, has

twelve town trustees of Sheffield, and a member of the town been appointed Registrar of the Barnet County Court

council of the borough. (Circuit No. 37) jointly with Mr. Stanley Harris. Mr. Boyes was admitted a solicitor in 1870. He is an

Mr. CHARLES WILLIAM REES STOKES, solicitor, of Tenby, LL.B. of St. John's College, Cambridge, where he

has been appointed by the high sheriff of Pembrokeshire (Sir graduated in the Law Tripos in 1866. Mr. Boyes

Owen Henry Philipps Scourfield, Bart.) to be Under-Sheriff of has also been appointed Clerk to the County Magistrates

that county for the ensuing year. Mr. Stokes was admitted at Barnet, on the resiguation of Mr. Harris.

a solicitor in 1864, and is town clerk of the borough of Tenby.

Mr. FREDERICK CONDE WILLIAMS, a judge of the District Mr. WILLIAM Brice, late a solicitor, of Bristol, has been

Court of Jamaica, bas been appointed a Puisne Judge of the appointed a Magistrate for Gloucestershire. Mr. Brice was

Supreme Coart of the Colony of Natal. Mr. Justice Williams admitted a solicitor in 1833. He was for many years clerk

was Christ's College, Cambridge, where he graduated to the city magistrates at Bristol, and was town clerk of that

B.A. in 1868. He was called to the bar at the Inner Temple city from 1874 till 1880. He retired from the legal profes.

in Easter Term, 1873, and he formerly practised on the sion on resigoing the office of town clerk.

Midland Circuit and at the Warwickshire, Birmingham,
Mr. GEORGE DICKINSON BYFIELD, solicitor (of the firm of and Coventry Sessions. He was appointed a district judge in
Houghtons & Byfield), of 85, Gracechurch-street and Barnet, | Jamaica in 1876.
has been elected Clerk to the Barnet Board of Guardians,
Assessment Committee, School Attendance Committee, and
Rural Sanitary Authority, in succession to Mr. Stanley
Harris, resigned. Mr. Byfield is also clerk to the East Barnet

Valley Local Board, and was admitted a solicitor in 1873.
Mr. BENJAMIN SCOTT CURREY, solicitors (of the firm of

Barber, Currey, & Boroughs), of Derby, has been appointed

Joint Stock COMPANIES. by the high sheriff of Derbyshire (Mr. Francis James Sum

LIMITED IN CHANCERY. ner) to be Under-Sheriff of that counts for the ensuing BROOKE, SWINDELLS, AND COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for wind. year. Mr. Currey was admitted a solicitor in 1852.

ing up, presented March 9, directed to be heard before the M.R.

on March 26. Milne and Co, Harcourt bldgs, Temple, agents for Mr. G. R. Dodd, solicitor, of 54, New Broad-street, 1 Wood and Co. Manchester, solicitors for the petitioner London, E.C., has been appointed a Commissioner in England i ELECTRIC WRITING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up,

presented March 8, directed to be heard before the M.B. on March for taking Affidavits in the Supreme Court of the Province

19. Shum and Co, Theobald's rd, Gray's inn, agents for Kidson of South Australia.

and Co, Sunderland Mr. THOMAS FORSTER, solicitor (of the firm of Keenly


tors are required, on or before April 8, to send their names and side, Forster, & Forster), of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, bas been addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims to Joshua elected an Alderman for that borougb. Mr. Forster was ad

Armitage Riley, Cheapside, Halifax, the official liquidator. Apr mitted a solicitor in 1860.

29 at 12 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts

and claims Mr. JOHN PICTON MEREDITH GEORGE, solicitor, of Car- HUDDERSFIELED QUARRYING COMPANY, LIMITED.-The M. R. has digan, bas been appointed by the high sheriff of Cardigan

by an order, dated Jan 18, appointed Fred Carter, Huddersfield,

to be official liquidator shire (Sir Marteine Owen Mowbray Lloyd, Bart.) to be PELHAX PUBLISHING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding Under-Sheriff of that county for the ensuing year. Mr. up, presented March 9, directed to be heard before the M. R. on George is the son of Mr. William Griffith George, solicitor,

March 19. Munns and Longdon, Old Jewry, solicitors for the

petitioners town clerk of Newport, Pembrokeshire. He was ad.

[Gazette, March 11.] mitted a solicitor in 1877, and he is in partnership with his


for winding up, presented March 11, directed to be heard before Mr. WILLIAM MORGAN GRIFFITHS, solicitor, of Carmarthen

the M.R. on March 26, Purser, Fenchurch st, solicitor for the

petitioners and Narberth, has been appointed by the high sheriff of

HARTLEPOOLS NEWSPAPER AND PRINTING COMPANY, LIMITED.Carmarthenshire (Mr. Charles William Mansel Lewis, of By an order made by V.C. Bacon, dated March 5, it was ordered Stradey Castle) to be Under-Sheriff of that county for the

that the voluntary winding up of the company be continued. ensuing year. Mr. Griffiths was admitted a solicitor in

Rowley and Co, Great Winchester st bldgs, solicitors for the peti.

tioner Michaelmas Term, 1868, and is a commissioner to MADRAS IRRIGATION AND CANAL COMPANY, LIMITED.-The M.R. administer oaths, and g perpetual commissioner for has fixed March 23 at 12 at his chambers for the appointment of

an official liquidator taking acknowledgments of deeds by married women,

(Gazette, Mar, 15.] is clerk to the visiting justices of the Joint Counties Lunatic Asylum at Carmarthen, to the magistrates

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES DISSOLVED. of the Llanboidy Division of the said county, and to

CARPET WEAVERS' FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Co-operative Assemby the Board of Conservators of the Carmarthen Bay Fishery

Rooms, Wilton, Wilts. March 8

BRIGHT STAR LODGE, Grand United Order of Oddfellows, Welling. District ; he is also assistant Conservative registration agent ton Inn, Oldham, Lancaster. March 8 for the districts of Carmarthen and Kidwelly in the said MID SUSSEX LODGE FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Nottingham Ancient Imcounty.

perial United Order of Odd Fellows, Bull Inn, Newick, Sussex

March 9 Mr. RICHARD STEPHENS JACKSON, solicitor (of the firm of

Truro FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Trury, Cornwall. March 4 Farlow & Jackson), of 5, St. Benet-place, Gracechurch-street,

[Gazette, Mar. 11.1 and of Gravesend and Sittingbourne, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

The progpeotus of the Indian Zoedone Company, Mr. WILLIAM DANIEL HENRY OEHME solicitor, (of the Limited, has been issued ; capital £100,000 in 100,000 nrm of Oehme & Summerhays), of 167, Gresham House, Old shares of £1 each. The company bas been formed for the Broad-street, London, and Brighton, has been appointed a purpose of buying from the Zoedope Company the excluCommissioner of the High Court of Judicature at Fort

eive right to manufacture and sell zoedone in India, William in Bengal to take Affidavits and also the Acknow.

Ceylon, and Burmab. The amount to be paid is £25,000 ledgments of Married Women in respect of property in | in cash and twenty founders' certificates, which entitle the India.

holders to one-half the surplus profits in any year in which Mr. WILLIAM PILCHER, solicitor, of Marlborough Chambers, the shareholders shall have received a divideod of 20 per 49, Pall Mall, S.W., has been appointed a Commissioner to l cent.

« PreviousContinue »