Page images
PDF

solo was one which ooald not be sustained at all. He was of opinion also that the usage which the defendant alleged, and whioh he had proved to have existed for more than sixty years, was referable only to the consent and sufferanoe of successive tenants for life of the lands of whioh the plaintiff was the absolute o»nir. TbeConrt of Appeal (james, Brett, and Cotton, L.J J.) agreed wi h Baoon, V.O., as to the construction of the decree of 1693, bnt they held that the defendant had established his olaim by prescription, and that as be and his predecessors in title had claimed as of right, and were shown by the evidence to have actually taken as of right, and without B"j permission from the owners of the soil, brakes, &0-, from the common allotment for the nse of their tenement for upwardsof sixty yean immediately before the commencement cf the aotion, they had acquired a right nnder the statute, notwithstanding the faot that they had claimed the right under the mistaken notion that all the commoners were entitled to it nnder the deoree of 1S93. James, L.J., said that in order to establish a right by prescription nnder the Aot it was only necessary to show that the right claimed was one which ooald have had a legal origin by grant or otherwise, and that it had been notually exercised by the person claiming it, as of right and not by permission, daring the proper statutory period. It was immaterial that the right had been claimed on a wrong ground. And, in the present case, the right was claimed by a partioalar class of persons, holding particular tenements, in right of those tenements, and every member of the class might have had a legal grant of the right.—Solicitous, Home, Hunter, cfc Birkett; Cope <fc Co.

SolicitorManaging ClerkAuthority To Pledge Credit Of Principal.—Ina caseof Guebert v. lloir,before the Court of Appeal on the 23rd inst., the question arose whether the managing clerk of a solicitor has a general authority to pledge the credit of his principal in a matte.' collateral to the conduct of an action. The question arose upon an application by the defendant to compel the solicitor of the plaintiff to pay the sum of £50 as security for the oosts of the action, in pursuance of a personal undertaking which he was supposed to have given to do so. On the hearing before Malins, V.C., of a motion by the plaintiff, the objection was taken that he was out of the jurisdiction, and that he ought to give security for costs. His counsel then stated, conceiving himself to be authorized by the managing clerk of the plaintiff s solicitor, who was in court (the solicitor himself not being there) so to state, that the plaintiffs solicitor would give a personal undertaking to pay £50 as security for costs, and on this statement beiug made, the hearing of the motion was allowed to proceed, and an order was made upon it in favour of the plaintiff. The order was drawn up, but the undertaking of the solicitor was not mentioned in it, and the solicitor was not required to sign the registrar's book. When the application was afterwards made to enforce the undertaking, it appeared that the managing clerk had no special authority from his principal to give the undertaking, or to pledge his principal's credit in any way, and the clerk also deposed that he never intended to do so, and that what he really intended to do was to give an undertaking on behalf of the plaintiff himself to pay the £50, the plaintiff being at that time actually in England. Malins, V.C., held that the clerk had a general authority to give the undertiking on behalf of his principal, and ordered the principal to pay the £50. The Court of Appeal (jessel, M.K., and James and Cotton, L.JJ.), reversed this decision. Jessel, M.R., said that assuming that the managing clerk did authorize the statement which was made by the plaintiffs counsel, it was sworn that he had no special authority to do so. It was said that be had a general authority to pledge his principal's oredit to any extent to the payment of money in a matter collateral to the conduct of the action. If there was such an authority, his lordship oould see no limit to it in point of amount. He was aware of no authority for snoh a proposition, and, so far as decided cases went, it had been held that neither connsel nor solicitor had power to bind the olient to anything collateral to the aotion—e.g., to a compromise. Why should a managing olerk have a greater power over his master's purse than any other servant? There was no authority for holding that he had, and his lordship oould

see no reason in principle for saying a managing olerk had power to pledge his master's credit in this wayThere was, therefore, nothing to bind the solioitor to pay the money. James, L.J., added that the defendant might have stopped the drawing up of the original order by saying that he would not consent to its being drawn np until the £50 was paid, or the solicitor's undertaking was given in writing.—Solicitors, Q. H. $ S. Brandon; J. B. Churchill.

Practice—Solicitor And ClientLien On CostsNotice To Party Baying To Pat Costs—Payment -withOut NoticeSolicitor's Right To Payment Again From Client.—In a case of Re Fenneott, Fenieott v. Proudfoot, before the Master of the Rolls on the 18th inst., a motion was made by the plaintiff to restrain a solicitor from issuing execution for the recovery of his taxed costs under the following circumstances :—The defendant in the action had recovered'judgment for the costs of the action, and had employed two solicitors. The costs payable to the two solicitor* were taxed, and one solicitor gave notice to the plaintiff, after the taxing master's certificate had been issued, claiming a lien for his costs and requiring them to ' e paid to him. This the plaintiff did, and he also paid the taxed costs of the other solicitor to the defendant, as he had received no notice of lien from him. The second solicitor sent the plaintiff notice that unless his costs were paid him over again he should issue execution upon the judgment. The above motion was accordingly made. Jessel, M.K., was of opinion that the solicitor was not justified in threatening to issue execution, and that the plaintiff, having paid the costs without notice, could not be compelled to pay them over again. The plaintiff was entitled to have satisfaction entered upon the judgment, and the solicitor would have to pay the costs of the motion.—Solicitors, H. A. Patience ; Meredith*, Roberts, $ Mill/.

PracticeDecree Directing Indemnity—No Deed Of IndemnityEnforcing Payment Of IndemnitySeparate Proceedings.—On Maroh 17, an application for an order to direct payment by the defendant to the plaintiff of a stated sum by way of indemnity upon a contract was heard before Hall, V.C., in an action of Hellish v. Rose. The plaintiff and defendant, having been in partnership, took a decree for dissolution in a partnership action, and by the decree the defendant was ordered to take over a certain building contract and to indemnify the plaintiff in respect thereof. It now appeared that the plaintiff had, since the decree, paid the contracting builder a sum of £39 for work done on the contract, but with rat the assent of the defendant. He took no assignment of the contract from the partnership, nor any deed of indemnity from the defendant. He now applied as above for payment of the £39, and it was urged on his behalf that he was, in effect, seeking the enforcement of ihe decree ; that payment of th • indemnity was "indemnifying the plaintiff ' within the terms of the decree, and that the order asked would properly be made in tho action. If it were necessary to institute separate proceedings, they must be taken in the High Couit of Justice, as the County Courts Act prohibit an action being brought there npon a judgment of the High Court. The defendant's case was that the plaintiff should hive taken an assignment and indemnity, and brought his action, if any, upon the latter, when the amount payable could have bee a assessed by ajury. He claimed to have a good defence to the plaintiff's case upon the merits, and was even now willing to sign an indemnity if tendered. Hall, Y.C., said that the decree contemplated an assignment and inde unity, but th.it, as the matter stood, hi was in substanoe asked to try a separate action upon an interlocutory application. The proper course would be to take independent proceedings, and the motion must be refused wtth costs.—Solicitors, Piesse % Son; llogan ct Hughes.

InjunctionRailway CompanyCompulsory Taking* Of Land Whole Of Capital Subscribed Several. Branches Of Undertaking—Certificate Op Justices— 8 & 9 Vict. C. 18, ss. 16, 17.—In a case of Roster v. The Pontypridd and Caerphilly Railway Company, before VioeChancellor Hall, on March 17, the plaintiff made an interlocutory application for an injunction to restrain the company from proceeding under their compulsory powers to> take la. Or. 20p. in the county of Glamorgan, belonging to himself, for the purposes of a projected railway, until the whole of the capital or estimated sum required for the expenses of the undertaking should have been subscribed (as required by [he provisions of the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845). The Aot further requires that a certificate that the capital has been so subscribed shall be signed by two justices of the peace for the county where the matter requiring their cognizance arises. It appeared that the company was formed to make more than one railway, the undertaking consisting of two or three branches. Two justices far Monmouthshire, in whioh county part of the railway now in question was to be made, had certified that the capital required for that part of the undertaking of the company had been subscribed. His lordship, however, held that, even assuming the certificate to be in order, the court was not, under the Act, to be bound thereby as conclusive. There had been, in the present instance, no sufficient compliance with the statute, and it might well be that Parliament would not have sanctioned the one railway only, without the others included in the undertaking. He, therefore, made the order asked, and with the company's consent, the injunction was made perpetual, with an order for payment by the company of the costs of the action.— ;Solicitors, W. Rentmore, for Spickttt <S; Price, Pontypridd; Wilkins, Myth, $ Fawthawe.

CASES BEFORE THE BANKRUPTCY
REGISTRARS.

(Before Mr. Registrar Pepts, acting as Chief Judge.)
March I.—Ex parte Tilly, Re Weld.

A non-trader, being in embarrassed circumstances, executed a deed whereby he charged and made liable all his real and personal estate in possession, reversion, remainder, or expectancy with, the repayment to a trustee of the sum of £55,000, being the Relegate of the debts specified in the first sohedule thereto.

Held, that the deed constituted an act of bankruptcy.

This was a motion on behalf of John H. Tilly, the trustee of the estate of Shireburn J. Weld (a non-trader), to deolare void a deed dated the 30th of Angust, 1880, made between the bankrupt of the first part, J. E. Hodges of the second part, Robert C. Hutchings, Horatio Brandon, and Francis Lamb of the third part, apd the sever il persons whose names were specified in the first schedule, of the fourth part.

In August, I8S0, the bankrupt, being in embarrassed circumstances, called a meeting of his creditors, and, on the 30th of the same month, he executed the deed in question, whereby he charged and made liable the contingent reversionary life estate to whioh he was entitled in the Lulworth Castle estates, and all his other real and personal estate in possession, reversion, remainder, or expectmoy, with tlie repayment to Bodges of the sum of £55,000, being the aggregate of the debts specified in ihe first schedule. And it was declared that Hodges should stand possessed of the said sum of £55,000 upon trust for the several persons named in the first schedule, rateably and in proportion to the amounts of their debts. The bankrupt also covenanted to execute, when cailed upon, a valid assurance of the whole or any part of the premises charged, by way of mortgage, for securing the sums intended to be secured.

The deed had not been registered under the Bills of Sale Act.

On the 12th of December, 1880, the bankrupt was adjudicated, the act of bankruptcy being the non-compliance with the terms of a debtor's summons.

Winslow, Q.C., and Creed, in support of the motion.— The deed is an equitable assignment for the benefit of certain creditors, and is an art of bankruptcy under section ■ 6 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, sub-sectiocs 1 or 2; and the oircumstance that the bankrupt is a non-trader is immaterial. He cited Ex parte Mackay (L. R. 8 Ch. 643).

Yate Let, and Rashlcigh, fsr the respondents.—The deed is not a "conveyance or assignment." It is not for the benefit of the creditors generally: Qreenioood v. Churchill (1 Mylne & Keen, 646). Secondly, an agreement to give a bill of sale cannot be an act of bankruptcy : Mercer r. Peterton (L. E. 3 Ex. 104).

Wirulow, in reply.

Mr. Reoistrar Pepts.—It appears to me that I am asked to do rather more than has hitherto been done in cases of this kind, but, at the same time, I must aot under the guidance of those cases. None of them are distinctly on all

fours with the esse before me, but I am bound to do the best I can, having reference to the class of cases that have been decided, and the reasons which have influenced the judges in coming to their decision. It appears to me that the trustee appointed under this deed is in this dilemma. This is an assignment or transfer of the property of the bankrupt either to the whole or to a portion of bis creditors, and in either oase it is an act of bankruptcy under the 6th soction of the Act. The difficulty that I have about the case is whether this charge can be held to be equivalent to a transfer or assignment of the property. On the whole I think I must look upon it as an absolute assignment, an assignment of the whole of the estate and effects of the bankrupt to secure a oharge for the benefit of a certain portion of the creditors. It has been pointed out by counsel, very properly, that whether it is an assignment for the benefit of one creditor, or a dozen or twenty, or the whole of the creditor?, it comes to the same thing. It is virtually an assignment of the whole of the bankrupt's property in paymer.t of a past debt. The question arose whether it was an assignment of the whole of the property. Considering it was an assignment of £55,000, it was practically an assignment of the whole. Whether or not it was for the benefit of all the creditors who chose to come in it is not for me to say, but there are creditors who have not come in under the deed, and to those creditors a large dividend will have to be paid. I think, therefore, they have a right to ask that this transfer be declared void.

Solicitors for the trustee, Campbell, Reeve, <t- Hooper.

Solicitors for the respondents, Munns <0 Longdcn.

(Before Mr. Registrar Pepts.) March 4.—Re Slattery. A creditor who has not proved any debt under a petition for liquidation is not entitled to be heard in opposition to an application by the debtor for the registration of resolutions by which the statutory majority of creditors accept a composition. Leave to prove nunc pro tunc refused.

This was an application by a debtor who had presented a liquidation petition for the registration of the resolutions passed by the statutory majority of the creditors, accepting a composition of one shilling in the pound, payable three months after registration, with security.

J. Linklater, on behalf of a creditor who had obtained an adjudication against the debtor, coupled with a stay of proceedings, opposed the application, on the ground that the debtor had refused to answer questions put to him at the meetings of creditors, and on other grounds.

Brough, for the debtor, objected that the creditor, not having proved auy debt under the petition, had no locus standi. He cited Ex parte Kirhiaood (L. R. 11 Ch. D. 724), which had been followed by Air. Registrar Brougham.

Linklater.—Mr. Registrar Murray, in Ex pirte Dnlgairni (not reported), allowed a creditor, who had not proved, to be heard. The debt appears in the statement of affairs filed by the debtor, and its existeuce was not disputed under the petition for adjudication.

Mr. Reoistrar Pkpys.Ex parte Kirkwood was a case of liquidation, and not composition, and, as there seems to be some doubt as to what the practice is, I will consult my colleagues upon the subject.

Later in the day, Mr. Registrar Pepts intimated that he had consulted his brother registrars, and they agreed with him in the opinion that a creditor who did not prove a debt at the first meeting had no locus standi to oppose, under rule 293, an application to register resolutions for composition. By obtaining an adjudication, and declining to prove under the petition for liquidation, the creditor in this case placed himself in a position antagonistic to toe other creditors, and he ought not to be heard.

Linklater then applied for leave to provo nunc pro tunc, on the ground that a misapprehension had arisen as to the practice of the court.

Mr. Rboi8tear Pepts.—I cannot allow that. If a proof had been tendered at either meeting, the creditors might havo opposed it.

Solicitor for the opposing creditor, J. S. Rubinstein.

Solicitors for the debtor, Coltercll f Co.

(Before Mr. Registrar Brougham.)
March 9.—Re Dummere.

The circumstance that a liquidation baa been closed does not deprive the creditors of the right to grant the debtor's discharge at a meeting properly convened for that purpose.

Application for discharge. The debtor, Stephen Dunmere, presented a petition for the liquidation of his affairs by arrangement or composition in July, 1877, and at the first meeting, held on the 7th of August, the creditors passed a resolution for liquidation by arrangement, and appointed a trustee.

On the 26th of July, 1878, the creditors passed resolutions to the following effect:—

(1) That the trustee's acoount, including his remuneration, be, and the same is hereby, allowed, approved, and passed.

(2) Tbat the trusteo do forthwith declare and pay a dividend of 2s. 6d. in the pound.

(3) That the close of this liquidation shall take place as and from the 31st day of December, 1878.

(4) That William C. Cooper, the trustee, be released as and from the 31st day of December, 1878.

At that meeting the creditors declined to give the debtor his discharge, but in September last another meeting was convened, with the concurrence of one-fourth of the creditors, when a statutory majority resolved to give the discharge, but the objection had been raised in the liquidation office that, after the close of the liquidation, they had no power to do so, and the question was now submitted for the decision of the registrar.

Brough, in support of the application, referred to Ex parte Carlile (No. 70,537), where the same course had been adopted as in the present case, and Mr. Registrar Murray granted the order. [He was stopped.]

Mr. Registrar Brougham held that, by analogy to the rule in bankruptcy, the close of the liquidation did not deprive the creditors of the right to grant the debtor's discharge at'a meeting properly oonvened for that purpose, otherwise considerable hardship might be inflicted upon the debtor. The discharge would be allowed.

Solicitors for the applicant, Cottercll £ Co.

SOLICITORS' CASES. High Court Op Justice, Queen's Bench Division. (Sittings in Banc before Grove and Lixdley, JJ.) March 18.—In the Matter of A Solicitor. Macrae Moir said tbat the object of the present application was that the solicitor in question, who had been struck off the rolls in 1875, might, by the order of this court, be restored to his position thereon. The solicitor, Mr. Condy, had been admitted in 1848, and had practised for many years in Battersea. In 1872 he was tried for a conspiracy to defraud the creditors of one Abraham Fox, and having been found guilty of that offence he had been sentenced to imprisonment for twelve months. The present application first came before this court in April last, and it had then been ordered to stand over for the production of further and better affidavits, and that the facts in it might be laid before the Incorporated Law Society. The learned counsel for the applicant said that the principal witness against Mr. Condy had been the wife of the bankrupt. On being cross-examined, she had then sworn that she wan a chaste woman, which was not the case. Mr. Condy had subsequently taken proceedings against her for perjury as to this, and she had been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for two months. He had therefore been convicted, upon the evidence of a person who had at the trial been clearly guilty of perjury, of an offence of which he had always maintained he had been wholly innocent. Since 1873 he had acted as the managing clerk of a solicitor of great respectability, and from the affidavits before the court, it was clear that a very large number of persons of the highest respectability, resident in Battersea, believed him to be wholly innocent of the crime of which he had been found guilty.

Wills, Q.C. (with whom was Murray), sail that he appeared for the Incorporated Law Society, and that all he proposed now to do was to put the court in full possession of the wholo facta as to the conviction of Mr. Condy. Un

doubtedly several fraudulent debts had been concocted in thebankruptoy proceedings in question, some of the proofsbeing not real and others increased in their amounts. Mr. Condy was convicted substantially on the evidence of two persons named Elsey and Deacon. Mrs. Fox, the wifa of the bankrupt, had certainly also given evidence in the case, which was no doubt not unimportant, and in her crossexamination had committed perjury. When the bankruptcy proceedings had been before Mr. Stonor, the county court judge, he bad said that clearly an audacious fraud had been perpetrated, but he bad not caused the proceedings to be taken against Mr. Condy, who in his view had been a dupe and not a co-conspirator. There was one difficulty in the case, and that was that the present application was an attempt to induce this court to constitute itself into a court of appeal from the Divisional Court which bad ordered the applicant to be struck off the rolls.

Grove, J., said that the application could not be granted. Mrs. Fox had no doubt been convicted of perjury . bat that was because she had falsely sworn she was a virtuous woman. This was a fact whioh no doubt threw some doubt on her veracity ; bnt she had, in no sense, been a principal witness in the case against Mr. Condy. It was an undisputed fact that no attempt of any kind had been made to get the sentence passed by Sir Thomas Chambers remitted, nor had the latter done what he would no doubt have done if he had felt that the verdict against Mr. Condy had been clearly wrong—viz., have himself communicated with the Home Office stating that suoh was his opinion. The learned counsel for the Incorporated Law Society had done all in his power to assist the court in gettting at the real faots, aoting not as an advocate, but as one who represented that society, whose great object it was to keep the profession of solicitors par.-. His lordship said that in such cases as the present this court must refuse to constitute itself into a court of appeal.

Lindley, J., concurred.—Times.

LEGAL APPOINTMENTS.

Mr. Edward Harry Adcock, solicitor, of Palmerstonbuildingg. Old Broad-street, E.C., and Croydon-road, Penge, Surrey, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner in and for the Cities of London and Westminster, and the Counties of Middlesex and Surrey.

Mr. George Brumell, jun., solicitor, of Morpeth, has been elected Clerk to the Morpeth Board of Guardians, Assessment Committee, and Rural Sanitary Authority, on the resignation of his father, Mr. George Brumell, sen. Mr. Brnmell, jun., was admitted a solicitor in 1872, and is clerk to the Commissioners of Land Tax, and to the Governors of the Morpeth Grammar School.

Mr. Frederic Burrow, LL.D., solicitor, of Collumpton and Bradninch, has been elected (without opposition) Coroner for the Crediton District of Devonshire. He bad acted asdeputy-coroner for eleven years. Dr. Burrow was admitted a solicitor in 1866. He is town clerk and clerk of tbe peace for the borough of Bradninch, clerk to the county magistrates and to the Collumpton District Highway Board, and to the School Board of Willand, and solicitor to the Collumpton Burial Board and Gas Company.

Mr. John Monset Collyer, of Lincoln's-inn, barristerat-law, has been nominated Legnl Adviser to the Exchequer and Audit Department, Somerset House.

Mr. Harry Findon Davies, solicitor, of Weston-superMare, has been appointed a Perpe:ual Commissioner for Somersetshire aud Gloucestershire for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women.

Mr. RtcnARD Gibsox, solicitor (of the firm of R. & W. Gibson), of Hexham, lias been appointed by the high sheriff of Northumberland (John Gitfard UiddeU, Esq.) to be UhderShcriffof tint county for the ensuing year. Mr. Gibson was admitted a solicitor in 1837, and is clerk to the county justices for the two divisions of Ty nedale and Bellinghun, and also clerk to the Tyne Salmon Conservancy Board.

Mr. Edward Heelis, solicitor, of Appleby, has been appointed Clerk to the Lieutenancy for tbe County of Westmoreland. Mr. Heelia was admitted a solicitor ia 1856, and ia registrar of the Appleby County Court.

Mr. William Henry Nicholls, solicitor, of 4, Lincoln'sinn-fields, has been appointed a Commissioner for taking Affidavits in the Courts in the Provinces of Quebec and Ontario in the Dominion of Canada.

Mr. E. W. Sampson, solicitor, of Parsons-hill, "Woolwich, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

Mr. Cham.es Sanderson, solicitor (of the firm of Sanderson & Holland), of 46, Queen Victoria-street, and Calcutta, has been appointed a Commissioner for taking Affidavits in the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta, and also a Commissioner for taking; the Acknowledgments of Married Women in respect of Property in India.

Mr. William Thomas Sharp, solicitor, of Lanoaster, has been appointed by the high sheriff of Lancashire (Mr. William Foster) to be Under-Sheriif of that county for tbe ensuing year. Mr. Sharp is the eldest son of the lata Mr. John Sharp, solicitor, and was born in 1841. He is a B.A. of Trinity College, Dublin, and was admittod a solieitor in 1865. He is registrar of tbe Lancaster County Court.

Mr. Horace Smith, barrister, who has been appointed Recorder of the City of Lincoln, in succession to Mr. Justice Cave, is a graduate of Trinity Hall, Cambridge. He was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Easter Term, 1862, and is a member of the Midland Circuit. He has been for several years a revising barrister, and reoently acted as secretary to the Royal Commission for inquiring into the existence of Corrupt Practices in the City of Oxford.

Mr. Josiah Henry Stmon, solicitor and notary, of Adelaide, has been appointed Attorney-General of the Colony of South Australia in the new administration.

Sir John Henry De Villiebs, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court at the Cape of Oood Hope, has been appointed a Member of the Royal Commission for settling the affairs of the Transvaal. Sir J. De Villiers was called to the bar st the Inner Temple in Michaelmas Term, 1865. He was Attorney-General at the Cape of Good Hope from 1872 till 1874, when he was appointed Chief Justice of the colony, and ha received the honour of knighthood in 1S77.

DISSOLUTION OF PARTNERSHIP. Thomas Pain and Philip Perkins Hawtin, Banbury, solicitors (Pain & Hawtin). The said busincs wUl in future be carried on by the said Thomas Pain. March 15.

{Gazette, March 22, 1881.]

COMPANIES.

WINDING-UP NOTICES. Joint Stock Companies. Limited In Chancery. Cabbiaoe Co-operative Supply Association, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented March 10, directed to bo heard before the M.R. on March 20. Johnson, Millmun Bt, solicitor for the petitioners

London Aerated And Mineral "waters Company, Limited.— The M.R. has by an order, dated Feb 17, appointed William Aidridge, Basinghall st, to bo official liquidator

[Gazette, March 18.1

Baowoeih Colliery Company, Limited.—Tho M.R. has filed March 31 at 11 at his chambers for tho appointment of an official liquidator

Bournemouth And South Coast Steam Packet Company, Limited. —By an order made by Hall, V.C., dated March 11, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Bell and Co, Bow churchyard, agents for Alcock and Koutledge, Sunderland, solicitors for the petitioner

Eccleshill 'worsted Mill Company, Limited.—Tho M.R. has by an order, dated Feb 2*, appointed William Gilyard, Bradford, to be official liquidator

Mouth Vield Iron And Tyre Company, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented March 19, directed to be heard l)cfnre Hall, V.C., on Apr I. Ridsdale and Co, Gray's inn sq, solicitors for the petitioners

Tsoif's Gawber Hall Collieries, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented March 31, directed to bo heard before Hall, V.C., on Apr 1. Bell and Co, Bow churchyard, agents for Dees and Thompson. Newcastle-upon-Tyne, solicitors for tho petitioner *^ C Gatette, Mar. 22.J

Unlimited In Chancery. Yorkshire Pbovidrnt Loan Society.—Petition for winding up, presented March 15, directed to be heard before the M.R. on March 20. Peace and "Waller, Grocor's Hall ct, Poultry, agents for Leoroyd and Co, Uuddersiiold, solicitors for the petitioners

[Gazette, Mar. 18.1 Holly House Freehold Land Society.—By an order mado try the M.R. dated March 12, it was ordered that the society be wound up. Munton and Morris, Lambeth hill, agents for Parker and Brailsiord, Sheffield, solicitors for the petitioners

[Gazette, Mar. 22.] County Palatini! Of Lancaster. Higher Eanam Brewery Company, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented March 10, directed to bo heard before tho V.C. at the Assise Courts, Manchester, on March 29. Ktty, Liverpool, solicitor for the petitioner

[Gazette, Mar. 18.] Friendly Societies Dissolved. Abergele Union Society, Mona Vaults, Abergele, Denbigh. March 14

t Gazette. Mar. 18.] Hope Benefit Society, Norfolk Tavern, Middlegate st, Great Yarmouth. March 19

IGazette, Mar. 22.]

SOCIETIES.

SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION. The usual monthly meeting of the board of direotors of this association was held on Wednesday, the 9th inst., at the Law Institution, Chanoery-lane, London, Mr. Lewis (Wrexhom) in the chair, the other direotors present being Messrs. Rickman (depnty-ohairman), Brook, Hedger, Janson, Keen, Pennington, Kosooe, Rose, Smitb, Walters, Williamson, and Woolbert (Mr. Eifte, secretary). A sum of £120 was distributed in grants of assistance to necessitous solicitors and the necessitous widows and families of deceased solioitors, five gentlemen were admitted members of the assooiation, and other general business was transacted.

OBITUARY.

MR. PEARLESS BARBER. Mr. Pearless Barber, solioitor, of Brighonse, died at Pinner on the 3rd inst. Mr. Barber was the son of Mr. Joseph Barber, solioitor, of Brighonse. He was born in 1834, acd he was educated at St. Peter's Sohool, York. He was admitted a Bolioitor in 1859, having been artioled to his father, to whose business ho shortly afterwards succeeded. He bad practised over about twenty-one years at Brighonse, having also during part of that time had a branch offioe at Bastrick. He was a perpetual commissioner for the West Riding of Yorkshire, and he was Bolioitor to the Rastrick Gas and Water Company. He) was an active member of the looal Conservative party. Mr. Barber was a fellow of the Royal Historical Sooiety and of tbe Hoyal Sooiety of Antiquaries, and he was for several years honorary secretary to the Yorkshire Topographical and Antiquarian Sooiety. Mr. Barber died at the residenoe of his brother, Mr. William Barber, barrister.

MR. ABBOTT THURNHAM. Mr. Abbott Thurnham, solicitor, of Ilkeston and Alfreton, died at his residence, Tbe Pines, Ilkeston, on the 18th nit., after a long illness. Mr. Thurnham was admitted a solioitor in 1870, and had praotised for about ten years at Ilkeston and Alfreton, having for the latter part of that time been in partnership with his younger brother, Mr. Henry Thurnham, of the Alfreton Local Board. The deceased was a perpetual commissioner for Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, and he had a good private practice, and / held several looal appointments. He was for several years olerk to the Heanor Looal Board, and to tho South Wingfield and South Normanton Sohool Boards. He was also solicitor to the Krewosh Valley Building Sooiety. Mr. Tbnrnham's health had for a long time been bad, and ho had been compelled to withdraw from active practice.

CREDITORS' CLAIMS.

CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. LAST DAY OF PROOF.

Oleadall, John, Tickliill, York, Fanner. March 31. Gleadall v Wood, M.R. Esam, Sheffield

Gbkenway, Elizabeth, Stanhope st, St Pancras. March 31. Slight v Waugh, V.C. Malins. Walker, Fitzroy st, Fitzroy sq

Harris, Emily Frkdbrica, Teignmouth, Devon. March 31. Harris v Fitzroy, M.R. Were, Plymouth

Livesey, Thomas, Sough, nr Over Darwen, Retired Cotton Manufacturer. April 4, Baron v Aspden, V.C. Kail. Coateker, Over Darwon

Roach. Benjamin, Spitalfiolds Market, Liconsed Victualler. March 31. Roach v Roach, V.C. Hall. Hutton, New Broad st

Stephens, Elizabeth Downes, Kingsland rd. March 21. Stephens v Stephens, V.C. Hall. Bothamley, Queen Bt, Cheapside

[Gazette Mar. 4.]

J>ayidson, Alexander Horsburgh, Northumberland pi, Bayswater, Gent. May 31. Stone v Sabonadiere, V.C. Malins. Taylor, Field ct, Gray's inn

Fawcett, Benjamin, Weston-super-Mare. April 25. Fawcott v Fawcett, V.C. Hall, Wasbrough, Bristol

Ives, Samcel, Great Yarmouth, Soda Water Manufacturer. April 9. Ives v Ives, V.C. Hall. Diver, Great Yarmouth

Pullan, Richard, Darlcy, York, Gent. April 8, Pullan v Pullan,

M.R. Batcson, Harrogate :roijehts, John Henry, Hereford. April 1. Lapthorno v Hunt, V.C. Malins. Corner, Hereford

Wilson, James Dickson, Cheltenham, Liout-Col Bengal Army. March 28. Mein v Constable, V.C. Bacon. Brvdgcs, Cheltenham

\ Gazette, Mar. 8.]

Carnbs, Thomas, Romsey, Southampton. Apr 6. Barnes v Fish, M.R. White, Winchester

Bell, George, Stubbington, Southampton, Gent. Apr 13. Carter v Stadden, V.C. Hall. Newman, Southampton

•coltman, Edwin, Hinckley, Leicester, Innkeeper. Apr 18. Coltman v Coltman, V.C. Malins. Wright, Leicester

Conyngham, Hon Francis Nathaniel, Piccadilly. Apr 11. Lambart v Brinckman, V.C. Malins: Saltwell, Stone buildings

Daniel, John, Duston, Northampton, Gent. Apr 6. Northamptonshire Union Bank, Limited v Daniel, M.R. Roche, Daventry

Fitzmaurick, Hon Sarah Jane, Plas Llwyoon, Anglesea. Apr 0. Fitzmaurice v Fitzmaurice, M.R. Meynell, Whitehall pi, Westminster

Harrow, Henry, Stoke next Guildford, Gent. Apr 11. Sams v Boys, V.C Malins. Green, Havant, Hants

Wallerstkin, Elizabeth, Oxford rd, Ealing. Apr 12. Fuller v Wallerstoiu, M.R. Hall, Warwick ct, Holborn

[Gazette, March 11.]

Allin, William, Stanstcad Abbott, Hertford, Miller. Apr 20. Canning v Green, V.C. Hall. Rae, Gt Winchester Rt buildings ■ Collins, William Henry, Cromwell rd, South Kensington, Brevet Major Royal Engineers. Apr 16. Collins v Collins, V.C. Hall. Barnes anil Bernard, Finsbury circus

Gorfielp, William Archer, Aberdeen pk rd, Highbury, Shorthand Writer. Apr 9. Corfiold v Cortield, M.R. Grece, Rodhill

Nutt, Thomas, Ketton, Rutland, Farmer. Apr 10. Harrison v Nutt, V.C. Malins. Stapleton, Stamford

Spencer, John, Wood green, Gent. Apr 9. Harmer v Spencer, V.C. Hall. Montagu, Bucklersbury

Sullivan, David, Eriglcfleld rd. Mar 31. Sullivan v Sullivan, V.C. Bacon. Beall, Queen Victoria st

[Gazette, Mar. 15.]

•CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. CAP. 25.

LAST DAY OF CLAIM. Andrews, Joseph, Newmarket St Mary, Suffolk, Builder. April 1.

Fenn, Newmarket Bairstow, Joseph, Blackpool, Lancaster, Innkeeper. March 23.

Charnley and Finch, Blackpool Bickham, Catherine-, Milverton, Somerset. April 30. Payne, Mil

verton

Bowyer, Mary Ann, Worcester. April 2. Hill, Worcester
Bbown, Elizabeth, Clifton, Rothorham. April 30. Badgers and
Co, Rotherham

, Brown, John, Abchurch lane, Banker. Juno 3. Bristow, John st, Adolphi

Buhls, Elizabeth, Maida vale, Kilburn. May 2. Miller, Sherborne lane

Butcher, James, Blackpool, Lancaster, Licensed Victualler. March

23. Charnley and Finch, Blackpool Camitian, Sergius, Liverpool, Tobacco Manufacturer, March 17.

Oliver and Co, Livorpool Carr, William, Blackpool, Lancaster, Livery Stable Keeper. March

23. Charnley and Finch, Blackpool Clarke, William Peddeb, Greenhill, B&ssenthwaite, Cumberland,

Esq. May 2. Cookson and Co, New sq, Lincoln's inn Corps, Richard, Fulmer, Bucks, Gent. June 1. Philbrick and

Corpe, Aust.mfrin.rs 'Cbftchlby, Thomas, Hastings, Sussex, Licensed Victualler. May

4. SmaUman.Q ueen st, Cheapside Dalton, Edward Tuitk, Queen Anne's Mansions, St James's park.

Major General in the Army. April 27. Farrer and Co, Lincoln's

inn fields

De Winton, Herbert William, Clifton, Bristol, Esq. April 30.

Bush nnd Cross, Bristol Drinkwatkr, Joseph, Whaley Bridge, Chester, Gent. April 19.

Fox, Manchester

Gosling, JAmks, Ickleton, Cambridge, Gent. June 23. Thurgcod

and Cox, Saffron Walden Haes, Edward Elry, Throgmorton avenue, Stockbroker. April 20.

Walter and Durham, Kingston on Thames
Hall, Maria, Southport. April 5. Welsby and Co, Southport

Harvey, William, Hove, Brighton, Gent. May 1. Clarke and Co, Brighton

Holmes, Mary, Mabledon pi, Euston rd. April 1. Foster, Gracechurch st

Hughes, Joseph, Sutton Coldfield, Warwick, Metal Dealer. April

4. Ansell, Birmingham Ings, Robert, Babcary, Somerset, Yeoman. March 25. Ross,

Castle Cary

Jones, Daniel, Manchester, Contractor. April 30. Bond and Son, Manchester

Jones, William, Kenflg, Glamorgan, Farmer. April 16. Curtis,

Neath » Maynard, Robert, Bishopsworth, Somerset, Gent. April 16. Sweet

and Burroughs, Bristol Morley, Jamrs Simpson, Heaton Mersey, Lancaster. April 15.

Atkinson and Co, Manchester Noddek, William, Ferry fry stone, York, Corn Miller. April 16.

Arundel and Son, Pontefract Openshaw, Squire, Elton within Bury, Lancaster, Grocer. April 9.

Grundy, Bury

Pickup, Ann, Rochdale, Lancaster. April 15. Standringand Taylor, Rochdale

Ponsonby, Catina, The Grove, Stratford, Essex. April 10. Leman

and Co, Lincoln's inn fields Powell, William, Oldbury, Worcester, Tobacconist. April 23.

Wright and Co, Oldbury Sangster, George, Wilson st, Limehouse, Mariner. April 4. Lindo

and Co, Coleman st Slater, Mary, Hawkshead, Lancaster. April 9. Sykes, St Swithin's

lane

Smith, Richard, Preston, Lancaster, Plasterer. May 1. Banks,

Preston

Taylor, Thomas, Lancaster, Wine and Spirit Merchant. April 9. Clark and Co, Lancaster

Turner, Eliza, Overton rd, Brixton. April 4. Lindo and Co, Coleman st

Wallace, Robert, Kirkdale. April 1. McGowen, Livorpool

Warner, John, Milton next Gravesend, Kent, Pilot. April 4. Drawbridge, Rochester

Wilcock, John, Galgate in Ellel, Lancaster, Liconsed Victualler. April 9. Clark and Co, Lancaster

Williams, Thomas, Prince's park, Liverpool, Gent. May 1. Rowe and Co, Liverpool

Woodward, Frances, Southport, Lancaster. April 5. Welsby and Co, Southport

l Gazette, Mar. 8.J

Auriol, Rev. Edward, Mccklenburgh sq, Clerk in Holy Orders

Apr 21. Woodrooffe, New sq, Lincoln's inn Bacon, Elizabeth, Brandram, Lee, Kent. Apr 12. Ba3'lis and

Pearcc, Church ct, Old Jewry Barrett, Sblina, Clcvedon, Somerset. March. 25. Newman and

Co, Yeovil

Benyon, Lkila Isabella Maria, Hill st, Berkeley sq. Apr 8. Benyon, Aylward, Stanmoro

Biddulph, Constance Pkteonella, Ledbury, Hereford. May 9. Stevens, Queen Victoria st

Bioham, Rachael, Llandenny, Monmouth. Apr 11. Williams, Monmouth

Bridge, John, Freetown, Bury, Beersoller. Apr 10. Grundy, Bury Beibuley, Elizabeth Anne Kk.nyon, Bury, Lancaster. Apr 15. Woodcock, Bury

Bribrley, William Kenyon, Bury, Lancaster, Draper. Apr 15.

Woodcock. Bury

Carrigan, William Pbrcival, Ram^gate, Kent, Retired Paymaster

R.N. Apr 10. Hubbard, Chancery lane Cragg, Samuel, Everton, nr Liverpool, Retired Blockniaker. Apr

20. Banks and Kendall, Liverpool Crossley, Rebecca, Halifax. May 7. Sutcliffe, Hcbden Bridge Elias, Thomas, Budwellty, Monmouth, Agent. Mar 31. Morgan,

Cardiff

Freeman, Henry, Desford, Leicester, Farmer. Apr 1. Miles and Co, Leicester

Geakb, Thomas Robert, Yeovil, Somerset, Cabinet Maker. Mar 25.

Newman and Co, Yeovil Greenwood, Elizabeth, Stone Bower in Burton, York. Nov 30.

Hartley, Settle

Hale, Ford, Albert sq, Clapham, Gent. April. Kempster, Lower Konnington lane

Hammond, Emily, Yeovil, Somerset. Apr 2. Newman and Co, Yeovil

Hanson, William, East Moulsey, Surrey, Coal Merchant. Apr 25.

Cann and Son, Fenchurch st Hutchinson, Sarah, Moss Side, Manchester. Apr 13. Chapman

and Co, Manchester Jones, Arthur, Queen st, Mayfair. Apr 9. Button and Co, Henrietta st, Covent garden Jones, Matthew, Carshnlton, Surrey, Corn Merchant. Apr 1J.

Saxelby and Faulkner, Ironmonger lane Mackenzie, Murdo, Ullapoul, Ross-shire, Esq. March 25. Johnson

and Co, Austinfriars Miller, George, Brentre, Gloucester, Esq. Apr 30. Meade-King

and Bigg, Bristol Morley, John, sen, Gt Fenton, Stafford, Potter. Apr 17. Julian,

Burslcm

Norkis, Samuel Holkrr, Altrincham, Chester, Esq. Apr 30. Cun

liffe and Co, Manchester Nowlan, Jambs Charles, Chorlton cum Hardy, nr Manchester,

Esq. Apr 25. Grundy and Son, Manchester Partington, John, Worsloy, Lancaster. Apr 30. Atkinson and

Co, Manchester

Peii.l, Sarah, Ealing green, Ealing. Apr 11. Johnson and Master,

Southampton buildings, Chancery lane Pilkington, Thomas, Crook Hoy*Leyland, nr Preston, Lancaster,

Gent. Apr 25. Brewis, St Helen's Rodgers, William, Burslcm, Stafford, Butty Collier. Apr4. Julian,

Burslem

Roosb, Benjamin, Frondcg, Anglesea, Solicitor. Apr 2. Griffith Holyhead

« PreviousContinue »