« PreviousContinue »
Act, 1869, which provides that, “where any portion of TION-TRUSTEE APPOINTED SURVEYOR—LANDS CLAUSES the property of the bankrupt consists of things in action, CONSOLIDATION ACT, 1845, ss. 7, 9.-In a case of Peters v. any action, suit, or other proceeding for the recovery | The Lewes and East Grinstead Railway Company, on the of such things instituted by the trustee shall be instituted in 5th inst., the Court of Appeal (JESSEL, M.R., and BRETT bis official name, as in this Act provided, and such and COTTON, L.JJ.) held that the power given by section things sball, for the purpose of such action, suit, or 7 of the Lande Olauses Consolidation Act, 1845, to other proceeding, be deemed to be assignable in law, and to trustees of land for (inter alia) femes covert, to sell and to have been duly assigned to the trustee in his official convey the land on behalf of their cestuis que trustent to a capacity." But there are no negative words such as there railway company, does not extend to trustees on behalf of were in the corresponding section (section 141) of the a married woman of an absolute estate in fee simple for Bankruptcy Act of 1849, which provided that “neither the her separate use, suoh a married woman not being a person bankrupt, nor any person claiming through or under him under disability, but being competent to convey the land shall have power to recover the same, nor to make any release herself. The court also beld that when trustees of land or discharge thereof;. . . . but such assignees shall had appointed one of themselves, who happened to be a have the like remedy to recover the same in their own
surveyor, to act as a surveyor, under section 9 of the Act, names as the bankrupt himself might bave had if he in determining the price to be paid by a railway company bad not been adjudged a bankrupt.” The question
for a part of the land, such an appointment was not a arose thus :-A debtor, who was entitled to a reversionary valid one ander section 9, and that, consequently, there interest in a sum of stock, filed a liquidation petition in bad been no proper valuation, and the sale to the company March, 1873, under which, in June, 1873, a trustee was ap- was invalid as against the cestui que trust.-SOLICITORS, pointed. No discharge was given to the debtor. In July, 1873, he mortgaged , bis reversionary interest to A.
Cope & Co; Wyatt f Barraud.
In April, 1875, he mortgaged it again to B. The fund was in court in an administration action, and, in October, 1875, B. PRACTICE--EXTENDING TIME FOR APPEALING-PETITION obtained a stop order on the fund. On the 8th of November, -ORD. 58, RR. 9, 15.-In a case of In re Jaques, before 1875, A. obtained a stop order. On the 26th of November, the Court of Appeal on the 6th inst., an application was 1875, the debtor made a tbird mortgage to C., and in De made for an extension of the time for appealing, under the cember, 1875, C. obtained a stop order. In March, 1876, following circumstances. An order had been made, on petithe trustee obtained a stop order. The plaintiff in tion, for the division of a fund which had been paid into Palmer v. Locke, who bad purchased the rigbts of A. and court by a corporation for the purchase of land taken by B., and of the trustee, entered into an agreement to sell the them under the Lands Clauses Act. Some of the persons Teversionary interest. The purchaser, after an abstract of l entitled, who had claimed a larger share of the fund than title bad been furnished to him, discovered the existence of the order bad given them, were resident in America, and C.'s stop order, and he then required to be furnished the court was asked on their behalf to extend the three with an abstract of Co's incumbrance. The vendor weeks allowed for appealing, in order to enable their solicie declined to furnish it, on the ground that, by the operation | tors in England to receive instructions from them whether of section 22, the trustee bad obtained an absolute legal | they desired to present an appeal. The solicitors held & title, wbich no subsequent dealing by the debtor, even with power of attorney, but it did not distinctly authorize them a person who had no notice of the liquidation, could dis- I to present an appeal. The court (JESSEL, M.R., and BRETT place. Jeesel, M.R., held that an abstract of Oi's incum. and COTTON, L.JJ.) extended the time for a month. JESbrance must be furnished, and that if that incumbrance were | SEL, M.R., said that the order, though in form an interious Dot shown to have been discharged. it would be an | tory one, was really & final one. 10 was award incumbrance on the plaintiff's title. His lordship said I accident that it came to be made in a " matter." Rule 8, that the case was distinguishable from In re Bright's which provides that “the time for appealing from any order Settlement (28 W. R. 551, L. R. 13 Ch. D. 413), which arose or decision made or given in the matter of the winding up under section 141 of the Act of 1849, in which there were l of any company, . . . or any order or decision the negative words which did not occur in section 22 of the made in the matter of any bankruptcy, or in any matter Act of 1869. This decision was affirmed by tbe Court of l not being an action, shall be the same as the time limited Appeal (Lord SELBORNE, C., and BAGGALLAY and Lush. | for appeal from an interlocutory order under rule 15," was L.JJ.), who were of opinion tbat the question whether, if c. | made because, as a general rule, “matters " ought to be bad no notice of the liquidation when he obtained his disposed of quickly. The rule was really intended to promortgage, seeing that hý obtained a stop order before the vide for “other matters ” of a similar nature to bankruptcy trustee, his title might not be better than that of the trustee. I and winding up of companies, though the word “similar was too doubtful to be decided against the purchaser in the I had not been used. The present case, though it was withia absence of C.-SOLICITORS, Last & Sons ; Burne & Hunt. I the letter of the rule, was not within its spirit. But the
applicants must pay the costs of the application, for they
were asking for an indulgence. They should have given WilL-CONSTRUCTION-GIFTO CHARITY-UNCERTAINTY. | fuller instructions to their solicitors.--SOLICITORS, James, Son, -In a case of Marsden v. Graham, before the Court of Appeal & James. on the 4th inst., the question arose whether a gift by will to trustees for the benefit of a specified parish was a good charitable gist, or was void for uncertainty. The testatrix
LANDS CLAUSES Act, 1845—PURCHASE FROM LIMITED gave the residue of her personal estate to trustees upon
OWNER--PAYMENT OUT OF COURT-Costs of DISCHARGE OF trust to apply the same as to them in their uncontrolled
INCUMBRANCES.-In a case of Re Thorney's Trusts, before discretion should seem expedient, “in, for, or towards such
the Master of the Rolle, on the 2nd inst., certain lands end, intent, object, or purpose, or for or towards such ends,
had been taken by the Hall Dook Company, under their intents, objects, or purposes in or in connection with or in
special Acts, incorporating the Lands Clauses Act, from a relation to i he parish, as they should think fit, without being
limited owner, who held the lands for life, with remainders in any manner accountable to or responsible for the mode of over. The money was paid into court, and the trustees of the such application, or the end, intent, object, or purpose
settlement, the tonant for life and some of the persons thereof to any person or persons or body of persons whatso
interested in remainder now petitioned for payment out ever." The court (JESSEL, M.R., and BRETT and Cotton, and for the application of the money in discharge of L.JJ.) held that the gift was void for uncertainty, there
certain ipoumbrances on other parts of the settled estates. being, as JESSEL, M.R., said, nothing to limit the applica The petitioners asked that in addition to the costs of, tion of the gift to those purposes which the court considered and incidental to, taking the land, the company might also be charitable. The trustees might apply it to any object or ordered to pay the costs of and incidental to the discharge purpose they thougbt fit, provided that it was some object or of the incumbrances, and they relied on the cases of Garnett purpose in the particular parish. The case of Dolan v. v. Bradley (L. R. 3 App. Cas. 944), and In re Mercers' McDermot (L. R. 3 Ch. 676) was distinguishable.- Soli.
Company (L. R. 10 Ch. D. 481), as showiog that the court CITORS, Pritchard, Englefield, & Co.
had a discretion in the matters and could give the petitioners their costs. It was admitted that no provision
had been made by section 80 of the Lands Clauses Act for RAILWAY COMPANY-PURCHASE OP LAND BY AGREEMENT payment of the costs of discharging the inoumbranes -TRUSTEES-MARRIED WOMAN-SEPARATE USE-VALUA. and that in several cases it had been decided that the cowe
pany were not bound to pay such costs, but it was submitted possession, and also by a quasi-tenant ia tail in remainder, that it was a casus omissus from the Act, and that now with the concurrence of the quasi-tenant for life in possession. the court had a discretion as to such costs. J ESSEL, M.R., But the courts had declined to allow an alienation by a quasisaid that all that he had decided in In re Mercers' Company tepant in tail in remainder without the concurrence of the was that all costs of and incidental to applications to the quasi-tenant for life in possession, at least so far as it would court were in the discretion of the court, but the present costs have the effect of barring the remainders expectant on the were not relative to the application, but were subsequent estate tail, though probably such an alienation would have costs, and therefore not in the discretion of the court. been held to cruate a base fee. They had also disallowed a Under the circumstances, therefore, the company were not disposition by will by a quasi-tenant in tail in possession, bound to pay them, but as they were liable to pay the though he was, in one sense, entitled to the whole interest costs of an investment in land, he should give the petitioners in the property. The designation by the settlor of a person a fortnigbt, if they liked, within which to amend their peti. to take as special occupant after the first taker had been tion and ask for an investment in land.-SOLICITORS. Iliffe, held sufficient to limit his power of disposition. Lord Russell, & Iliffe; Chester 8: Co.
St. Leonards acted on this analogy in Allen v. Allen (2 D. & W. 307). His lordship said he should act upon it in the present
case. If the limitations created by the will had been created PRACTICE-FORECLOSURE-JUDGMENT AGAINST MORTGAGOR of an estate in fee, J. could not have defeated by his aliena. -PAYMENT WITHIN ONE MONTH.-In an action of Thorndontion the executory devise in favour of W., and by analogy v. Tell, which was an ordinary action by mortgagees for he could not be allowed to do so in the present case. His foreclosure, the plaintiffs by their minutes asked for jadg lordship then held, on the authority of Allan v. Backhouse (2 ment against the defendant for payment of the amount to V. & B. 65), that the will had created a charge on the estate be found due within one montb, instead of the period of for the purpose of renewing the lease, and that consequently six months given in the forms in Seton on Decrees. the mortgage debt must be paid out of the purchase-money. HALL, V.C., gave judgment as asked.-SOLICITORS, Jones, The further question arose how the remainder of the purBlaxland, f Son.
chase-money was to be applied. The petitioner contended that it ought to be laid out in the purchase of an annuity
for the lives upon which the lease was held, and that the ESTATE PUR AUTRE VIE_LIMITATION IN FEE WITH
annuity should be paid to him for his life. Fry, J., held EXECUTORY DEVISE OVER-POWER OF ALIENATION OF
that the case was governed by the principle of the decisions FIRST TAKER-LEASE FOR LIVES—TRUST FOR RENEWAL
in In re Wood's Estate (19 W. R. 59, L. R. 10 Eq.572), OUT OF RENTS-REFUSAL OF REVERSIONER TO RENEW_SALE | Hollier v. Burne (21 W. R. 805, L. R. 16 Eq. 163), and UNDER SETTLED ESTATES ACT- APPLICATION OF PUR- Maddy v. Hale (24 W. R. 1005, L, R. 3 Cu. D. 327). The CHASE-MONEY.-In a case of In re Barber's Settled Estates,
In a case of. In re Barber's Settled Estates, primary intention of the testator was to create a perpetuity before Fry, J., on the 2nd inst., & question arose as to the by means of a continual renewal of the lease. And when extent of the power of alienation of the first taker of an by the action of a third person, the estate was converted into estate pur autre vis, of which successive limitations had money, the court would leave it in the condition of inoney been created by will. The holder of a lease of land to him.
invested, and thus create another property of a perpetual self and his heirs, for the lives of Ihree other persons, devised character which would take the place of the original property it by his will to trustees, their heirs and assigos, upon the of the same character. The principle applied where there trusts therein declared, and he directed his trustees from time
| had been a sale under the general power conferred by the to time to let the land and to receive tbe rents and profits
Settled Estates Act. The balance of the purchase-money thereof, and thereout to keep the estate renewed and full lived. And he declared that his trustees should stand interest paid to the first taker.-SOLICITORS, Janson, Cobb, seised of the land upon trust for J., his heirs and assigns, & Pearson ; Hunt f. Son; Church, Sons, f. Clarke. but if he should die without leaving lawful issue living at his death, then upon trust for W., his heirs and assigns.
ping of one of the lives, renewed by the reversioner on the
(Before Mr. REGISTRAR Hazlitt acting as Chief Judge.) sion the reversioner refused to renew the lease or to sell the reversion, and the estate was then sold, with the sanction of
June 8.-Ex parte Miller and another, Re Levy. the court, under the Settled Estates Act. A petition was Costs of solicitors incident to meeting of separate creditors of presented by J., asking that the mortgage money might be one of two partners allowed out of the joint estate of the partpaid out of the proceeds of sale, and that the rights of ners in liquidation himself and W. in the balance of the purchase-money might This was an application on behalf of Messrs. A. Hindson, be declared. It was contended on behalf of the petitioner Miller, & Vernon, solicitors, for an order that the trustees that he, being the first taker of an estate pur autre vie, had of the property of Messrs. H. Levy & M. H. Levy should, the whole estate in him, and had the right to dispose of it, out of the joint estate in their hands, pay to the applic ints and thus to defeat the quasi-executory devise over after his the sum of £24, being the amount of their costs of and reorn quasi-estate in fee, and, consequently, that he was i lating to the meetings of the separate creditors of M. H. entitled to the whole purchase-money, subject to the morta | Levy, as taxed by the taxing master. gage. The precise point, it was said, had never been The debtors filed their petition on the 17th of January, actually determined. FRY, J., said, that though, when an 1881, and the general meetings of creditors, both of the estate pur autre vie was given to a man, all he could take l joint estate and of the separate estate of each of the partners, was an estate for life, and anyone who came in after him were duly held. came in as a special occupant, and not through him, yet in | Under the joint estate it was resolved to liquidate by many cases the Legislature and the courts had enforced an arrangement, and the creditors appointed trustees. In the analogy between successive limitations of an estate pur case of the senior partner, H. Levy, liquidation by arrangeautre vie, and similar limitations of an ostate in fee, and had ment was algn resolved upon, and the same trustees were given effect to the analogy with regard to the capacity and appointed, but at the meeting of the separate creditors of the incapacity of the first taker to alienate. His power of M. H. Levy a resolution was passed to accept a composition alienation had been limited by the intention, expressed of two shillings in the pound, and such resolution was duly by the settlor or donor, that a particular person should confirmed at a second meeting, and all the resolutions before be the special occupant after him. The Statute of Frauds mentioned were duly registered. enforced that analogy by enacting that the heir, though Messrs. Miller & Vornon were the solicitors acting for the only a special occupant, should hold the estate pur autre vie debtors, and presented the petition on their behalf, and as assets for the payment of the ancestor's debts. In they taxed three separate bills of costs against the joint the same way a number of decisions of the courts had per estates and the separate estates of the respective partners. mitted the creation of a series of limitations of an estate | The trustee duly paid the amount of the allocaturs obpur autre vie, quasi-estates for life, quasi-estates in tail, and tained in respect of the joint estate, and also the separate quasi-estates in fee with executory devises over. The courts i estate of H. Levy, but, with respect to the costs now claimed had permitted an alienation by a quasi-tenant in tail in 1 by Messrs. Miller & Vernon, they disclaimed all liability.
From the joint estate a large sum of money bad been fied. The matter had been referred to one of the masters of realized by the trustees.
the court for inquiry, and his report was now read to the Vernon (solicitor), in support of the application, referred court. to rule 113, and was then stopped.
| Wills, Q.C., and Murray, appeared for the Incorporated E. M. Micholls, for the trustees.-Under rule 113, the Law Society. order must be made on the application of the trustee. According to the evidence taken before the master, as The present application is misconceived, and Messrs. embodied in his report, the defendant was an accountant, Miller & Vernon have no locus stàndi to make it. Rule living in Cha rlotte-street, Bedford-square, when he inserted 113 is no doubt framed in pursuance of section 20, which an advertisement in the Times addressed to solicitors instructs trustees in regard to their conduct in certain without practice, offering them business at a good rematters. This is not an ordinary case, and the rule must muneration. A solicitor named Cotton responded to the be strictly construed. It cannot apply in a case of com. advertisement, and an arrangement was entered into position. The applicants must obtain the amount of the between him and the defendant, which, however, was not costs from the debtor; the trustees cannot allow them out reduced to writing, and as to which the parties to it did of the joint estate. He also referred to rules 76, 102, and not quite agree in their description. It was clear, how. 285.
ever, from the defendant's own statement, that he was to Vernon, in reply.-The court has a discretion as to all have a certain share in the profits of the basiness, and costs : rules 186 and 188. The joint creditors have had the there was ample evidence that in various matters of a benefit of the proceedings as to the separate estate of M. H. legal character he had acted as an attorney, using the name Levy, and unless the meeting of the separate creditors had of Cotton, but without his knowledge or authority. Notice been convened, they could not have passed any valid of the rule had been duly served upon the defendant, resolution with reference to the joint estate. The solicitor and he had written in reply that he would instruct counhas no control over the resolutions which the creditors may sel to attend. No counsel, however, appeared on his bepass.
half. Mr. REGISTRAR Hazlitt.-I think the question is GROVE, J., said the rule must be made absolute for whether the meetings of the separate creditors were convened an attachment, but the defendant would be allowed a with a reasonable prospect of benefit to the joint creditors. week to purge himself, if he could, of his contempt of court.
Vernon.-The meeting of the separate creditors of M. - Times. H. Levy was a necessary step in the proceedings, and all the applicants ask is that the incidental costs be paid.
Mr. REGISTRAR HAZLITT said he thought he had a dig. cretion in the matter, and he should act opon it by allowing the costs out of the joint estate. A large amount had
THE PROPOSED CHANGES IN been realized by the trustees, and they must pay the appli. THE COURT OF APPEAL. cants the sum mentioned in the allocatur, and the costs of the present application.
The Lord Chancellor on Tuesday last, in introducing a Solicitor for the trustees, Montagu.
Bill to amend the Supreme Court of Judicature Acts, said that the Bill was in some respects of considerable import.
ance, but he hoped that it would not excite much difference SOLICITORS' CASES.
of opinion. A number of changes were proposed, sume of
considerable magnitude, others comparatively simple. Their QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION.
lordships were aware that the High Court of Justice had (Sittings in Banc before Grove and Denman, JJ.) contained the three separate divisions called respectively July 4.-Re E. Edmonds, a Solicitor. *
the Queen's Bench, the Common Pleas, and the Exchequer In this case the usual rule had been served upon Mr.
Divisions, and that these three divisions had recently been Edmonds, calling upon him to answer the matters contained
now but one division of what was popularly called the in certain affidavits, or, in default, to show cause why he should not be struck off the rolls.
common law side of the High Court and one Lord Chief
Justice. He would first address himself to the most imWills, Q.C., and Hollams, appeared for the Incorporated their statements it appeared that a
portant parts of the Bill. There had been Law Society, and from
five ex officio
judges of the Court of Appeal- viz., the Lord Chancellor, person of the name of Wood died in the year 1832
the Lord Chief Justice, the Master of the Rolls, the Chief possessed of certain real estate. In 1875 Wood's trustees
Justice of the Common Pleas, aud the Lord Chief Baron. sold a part of the trust property, and Mr. Edmonds received
Owing to the cessation of the two latter office theex officio judges the purchase-money, £3,250, of which he paid the greater
were reduced to three. The Court of Appeal further conportion, but retained a part in his own hands. In 1877 the
sisted of six ordinary judges; and that number had recently trustees sold more of the property, and Mr. Edmonds again received the purchase-money, £4,100, but this time he re
been reduced by the loss of a judge whose merits it would be tained the larger portion of the money, and refused to
very difficult by any language to do justice to, and imaccount for it.
possible to exaggerate-Lord Justice James. He spoke In August, 1878, the trustees brought an action against the
from long knowledge, and an intimate personal friendsolicitor, calling upon him to account for the money in his
ship of many years; and he could not speak of his
official services to the country without recollecting the hands, and an order was made for the payment of money
generosity of his noble nature. But, speaking of him only into court by the solicitor. In April, 1879, persons beneflcially optitled under Wood's will brought an action against
as a judge, he would say that the country had never been the trustees for an account. The solicitor failed to comply
served by a judge of higher character-of a sounder and with the order made, and subsequently filed a petition for
more rapid discrimination ; a more ardent love of justice
as distinguished from techoicalities; a more accurate liquidation, his creditors, with the exception of the trustees who took nothing, receiving one shilling in the pound. The
knowledge of law, and a greater power of immediately apsolicitor was onrepresented, and had done nothing beyond | plying that knowledge to the determination of the cases
which came before bim. For several years those qualities had asking that the case should be postponed. GROVE, J. (after stating the facts).-It does not appear to
been exhibited by the late Lord Justice as a Vice-Cban. me that the court has any option in this matter. The role
cellor, and for more than ten years in the Court of Appeal. must therefore be made absolute to strike Mr. Edmonds off
It would be very difficult for any man to bring to the the rolls.
duties higher qualities as a lawyer or as a man. Now, with Rule absolute.
regard to the Court of Appeal, although the business of Solicitor for the Incorporated Law Society, Williamson.
the court had been ably administered and arrears prevented from accumulating, yet the business was of an
arduous and important character, and it required strong July 4.- In the Matter of Edwin Hunt.
judges, as well as able judges, to prevent it falling into This was a case in which a rule for an attachment had been arrear. When the question arose what should be done to granted against the defendant for having, contrary to the
meet this state of things, it was impossible not to call to st atute, acted as a solicitor without being duly quali
mind the proposals which had been made by the Judicature
Commission." He had examined carefully into the recom• Reported by W. BLEW, E8., Barrister-at-Law. mendations and the various changes which had been made
down to the Act of 1875, when his noble and learned friend to the Acts which related to parliamentary registration proposed a scheme to meet the want which was felt by the and elections, the Acts proceeded on the footing of giving judicial power. It was then proposed to introduce into the final authority on matters of law to the court to which the Court of Appeal three judges of first instance, and Parliament had thought fit to intrust that class of cages. under extreme circumstances it would have been possible It was now proposed to make the decision final and conto bave four additional judges affording tomporary assist- olosive, unless the court thought fit to give a right to apance. Now, they had come to a time when the namber of peal, in which case the Court of Appeal woald bave juris"Ex officio judges was reduced from five to three. What he diction. The Bill also gave some usefal powers to regulate asked their lordships to do with regard to the constitution the holding of aggizes, and that power would not be limited of the Court of Appeal was this :-[Ie proposed to take the to winter assizes only, but would extend to all asgizes, by opportunity of reverting to the recommendation of the which means it was hoped that an inconvenience at present Judicatore Commission with regard to the position of the felt would be mitigated. The measure likewise deals with Master of the Rolls in connection with the Court of Appeal. the power under the Act of 1875 for making rules to govern Of the special qualifications of the Master of the Rolls he | the practice of the High Court. It also contained a clause need not speak; they were well known and appreciated by enabling the time of holding the sessions of the Central the country at large. It was not his proposal that the Criminal Court to be fixed, not, as was now required by Act present Mas: er of the Rolls sboald be transferred from bis of Parliament, by eight jadges, but by foor jadges of the position to the Court of Appeal. He reverted to the pro- Queen's Bench Division. It further contained provisions as posal of the Jadicature Commission. The Master of the to the appointment of officers of the courts and the filling Rolls was perfectly willing to undertake the position. up of vacancies in the staff of all the courte. There were Ingtead, therefore, of filling op the vacancy now existing various other minor provisions in the Bill, on which he among the ordinary judges in the Court of Appeal, he pro- need not now troable their lordships. poged that the Master of the Rolls should take up the position which seemed more in accordance with his office than that of being one of a number of judges of co-ordinate position, except in the matter of salary and a few other matters.
OBITUARY. The Master of the Rolls, therefore, would be-he did not say transferred-but confined to the Court of Appeal ; and practically, therefore, that would make it unnecessary to
MR. FREDERICK OUVRY. fill op the vacancy. Then he came to the consideration of
Mr. Frederick Ouvry, solicitor (of the firm of Farrer, ex officio judges. There were now two less than had been
less than had been Ouvry, & Farrer), of 66, Lincoln's-ing.fields, died at his recontemplated, and if the Master of the Rolls ceased to be
sidence, 12, Queen Anne-street, on the 26th ult. Mr. Ouvry one of these judges, of course three ex officio judges would
was the third son of the late Mr. Peter Aimé Ouvry, and have ceased to exist. He proposed in the first place that was born in 1815. He was admitted a solicitor in 1837, and the President of the Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty
had for many years carried on business at 66, Lincola's-innDivision, who was not now an ex officio judge of the Court
fields in partnership with his brothers-in-law, Messrs. William of Appeal, should become such an ex officio judge. He
James Farrer (the high bailiff of Westminster) and Fred. proposed in the next place that two other judges should
erick Willis Farrer. He was a perpetual commissioner for be appointed annually, to be at the service of the Court of
the county of Middlesex and the cities of London and Appeal when their other duties permitted. The question
| Westminster, and he had a large private practice, being remained-in what way should these annual appointments solicitor to Lady Burdett-Coutts, and to others of the nobility. be made ? He did not propose that they should be nomi.
He had been, since 1858, solicitor to the regiment of Scots nated annually by the Crown. Some other mode of selec
Guards. Mr. Oavry took a great interest in literary and tion, he thought, might be found ; they might be selected | antiquarian pursuits, and he was a vice-president of the as the election judges were now chosen. The judges of Society of Antiquaries, and one of the treasurers of the the High Court could meet together, and from year to Royal Literary Fund. year nominate for the succeeding year three of their body to serve in the Court of Appeal. Of course, they would not be called upon to do duty in the
MR. CHARLES CLARK, Q.C. Court of Appeal so as to interfere with their primary obliga Mr. Charles Clark, Q.C., died rather suddenly at his tions as judges in the High Court; they would be called upon residence, 10, Albert-road, Regent'-park, on the 25th alt. to assist when the state of business in their own courts ad Mr. Clark was in early life a parliamentary reporter on mitted of tbat assistance beiog given. Those proposals would the staff of the Morning Chronicle, and he was called to not subject the country to any substantial increase of expense. the bar at the Middle Temple in Easter Term, 1830, when It was also sought to remove some doubt as to the effect of | he joined the Home Circuit. He was the author of a the Act of 1877, under which an additional judge of first in
work oa Colonial Law, and acted about twenty-five years stance was to be appointed for the Chancery Division of the
ago as a commissioner to inquire into the laws of the High Court. The language of that Act did not make it
Channel Islands. He was, however, best known as a absolutely clear to his mind whether it authorized an appoint
law reporter in the House of Lords, where his reports ment on a single occasion only or an appointment from time dated back as far as the year 1827. They range through to time. He proposed to remove that doubt, and to enable
several volumes of “Dow and Clark," “ Clark and the power given by the Act to b: exercised from time to
Finnelly," and the “House of Lords Cages." About forty time. Occasion had also been taken to regulate some portions
years ago he was appointed offisial reporter to the House, of the existing law as to certain appeals. By the Divorce and
and since the establishment of the Law Reports he had Matrimonial Causes Acts certain appeals from the Divorce
continued to farnish the reports of Eoglish and Irish Court Judge were given to a court which was called the Fall
appeals. Mr. Clark was for many years a revising barrister, Court for Matrimonial Causes. He had consulted with the
He was elected a bencher of the Middle Temple in 1872, Jearned jud e who presided over that court, and found that he,
and in the following year he received a silk gown from as well as others, was of opinion that it would be desirable
Lord Selborne. He was formerly secretary to the that that appeal, which was practically to that judge
Jaridical Soiety, and he was an active member of the bimself, with the assistance of others, should no longer be to the Full Court for Matrimonial Causes, bat should,
Association for the Reform of International Law. He had like all other cases, go the Court of Appeal. He also pro
also been for many years treasurer of the Royal Society of posed, very much at the instance of that judge, to correct
Literatare, the meetings of which ha constantly attended.
Mr. Clark was a man of most amiable and courteous what in practice bad tarned out to be an unsatisfactory provision in the same Acts, which gave the right to appeal
disposition, and the recolleotions of his long professional from decrees for the dissolution or the nullity of marriage,
career imparted great interest to his conversation. Not with. not in the first instance when the decree nisi was given, but
standing his great age be retained all his active babits. when it had been made absolute after a certain lapse of
Ho caught a severe cold while taking a country holiday in 1872. Mr. Bagshawe bas for several years practised in MR. THOMAS WILLIAM RODGERS.
at Whitsuntide, but he still persevered in his work, and time, as if no cause were shown in the meantime it might be made as a matter of course. He proposed that for he was actually reporting in the Hoqge of Lords on the the future the appeal should be from the desret nisi. and | day before his death. The deceased was a bachelor. that there should not be another appeal. With regard i
the Rolls Court. He is a bencher of the Middle Temple, Mr. Thomas William Rodgers, barrister, of Endcliffe | and examiner in equity and the law of real property at the Vale, Sheffield, died on the 29th alt., while on a visit to University of London. London, after a short illness. Mr. Rodgers was the third
Mr. Claude LEATHAM, solicitor (of the firm of Scholey, son of Mr. Robert Rodgers, solicitor, of Sheffield, and was
Wilson, & Leatham), of Wakefield, has been appointed born in 1811. He was admitted a solicitor in 1834, and he soon afterwards went into partnership with his father, to
Clerk to the Magistrates for the Upper Osgoldcross whom he had been articled, and at a later date he was
Division of the West Riding. Mr. Leatham was admitted associated with his brother, Mr. Henry Rodgers. On his
a solicitor in 1878. father's death in 1841 he became clerk of indictments for
Mr. SAMUEL HALL SMITH LOFTHOUSE, barrister, has been the West Riding of Yorksbire, and deputy-steward of the appointed Deputy-Recorder of the Borough of Sheffield. Mr. Eccleshall and Sheffield Manorial Court of Requests, and Lofthouse was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Trinity on the passing of the first County Courts Act he became Term, 1869. He practises on the North Eastern Circuit, clerk to the Sheffield County Court (Circuit No. 13). He and at the West Riding of Yorkshire Sessions, afterwards withdrew from practice, and entered at Lincoln's Mr. Justice Mathew has received the honorary degree of inn, where he was called to the bar in Trinity Term, 1859, LL.D. from the University of Dablin. but he continued to reside at Sheffield, and he never practised as a barrister. Mr. Rodgers took an active part
Mr. JABEZ McDIARMID, solicitor (of the firm of McDiar. in local business, and he was for some time a town councillor
mid & Teather), of 5, Newman-court, Cornhill, has been for the Upper Hallam Ward. He was a member of the
appointed by Mr. Ogg, sheriff-elect, to be one of the undercommittee of the Sheffield Church Extension Society, and
sheriffs of London and Middlesex for the ensuing year. Mr. he was a magistrate for the borough, in which capacity he
McDiarmid was admitted a solicitor in 1864. often rundered valuable assistance to the stipendiary. He Mr. ARTHUR THOMAS SHEPHERD, solicitor, of Sanderland, was a magistrate and deputy-chairman of quarter sessions has been appointed Clerk to the Bishopwearmouth Barial for the West Riding of Yorkshire, and also a magistrate for Board. Mr. Shepherd was admitted a solicitor in 1876. Derbyshire, and chairman of the Eckington Petty Sessions. Mr. Rodgers retained the registrarship of the county court until his death (Mr. William Wake being associated with him in the office), and he was also district registrar at
DISSOLUTIONS OF PARTNERSHIPS. Sheffield under the Judicature Acts. Mr. Rodgers bad been
CHARLES MALCOLM MAGILL, ALFRED Ewen, and JAMES twice married, but he leaves no family. The news of his | GEORGE ROBERTS, solicitors, 75, Chancery-lane (Magill, death caused universal regret at Sheffield. On the 30th ult. | Ewen, & Roberts). June 24. So far as regards the said Mr. Ellison, the county court judge, and Mr. Welby, the sti.
Alfred Ewen and James George Roberts. pendiary magistrate, each paid a high tribute to Mr. Rodgers' | RANDALL GLYNES, Webster GLYNE), and ALFRED high character and attainments, and at the quarter sessions, FREDERIC CAURCH, solicitors, 29, Mark-lane (Glynes, Son, on the 1st inst., Mr. Wills, Q.C., the recorder, spoke of the Church). June 24. The said Randall Glynes and great public loss which had been sustained. He was buried | Webster Glynes will in futuro continue alone in practice, at Eccle:hall on the 2nd inst.
under the style of Glynes & Son, at 29, Mark-lane, and Alfred Frederic Church will in future practise alone at 45, Fenchurch-street.
[Gazette, June 28, 1881.) FRANCIS JAMES RIDSDALE, Charles RICHARD CRADDOCK, since deceased, and FRANCIS JAMES RIDSDALE, jan., solici.
tors, 5, Gray's-inn-square. Aug. 20, 1880. BIRMINGHAM LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.
[Gazette, July 1, 1891.] A general meeting of this society was held in the Law
JAMES JOAN CUMMINS, CHARLES ERRINGTON PEGler, and Library, on Tuesday evening last, J. Marigold, Esq., occupy- EDWARD JAMES BRUTTON, solicitors, 4. Union.curt, 011 ing the chair. Moot Point No. 649 was discussed, the
Broad-street (Cammins, Pegler, & Bruttoo), June 29. As subject being :-"A. bays goods of B., and C. guarantees
regards Edward James Brutton. the payment of the price. A. becomes insolvent bescre
[Gazette, July 5, 1881.] delivery, and before the vendor's right of stoppage in transitu is defeated. Can C., upon payment of the price, stop the goods in transitu ?" The speakers on the affirmative were Messrs. E. C. Rogers, Browett, Travis, O'Connor, and W. S. Rogers; and on the negative, Messrs. Davis and J.
COMPANIES. Clark. A spirited debate was carried on by both sides, and the chairman, in summing up the arguments, called attention to the particular difficulties of the question, and invited
WINDING-UP NOTICES. a further discussion by the members before putting it to the
JOINT STOCK COMPANIES. vote. The speakers availed themselves of the chairman's
LIMITED IN CHANCERY. invitation, and the moot being put to the meeting was
MORAY FIRTH MINING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Creditors are required carried in the affirmative. A hearty vote of thanks to the
on or before July 30, to send their nanes and addresses, and the chairman concluded the meeting.
particulars of their debts or claims. to John Henry Tilly, Quran Victoria st, Mansion house. Aug 6 at 12 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims UNITED SERVICE SUPPLY AssociaTIOX. LIMITED. - Petition for
winding up, presented June 30, directed to be heard beford .. LEGAL APPOINTMENTS.
Bacon on July 9. Best and Co, Essex st, Strand, solicitors for tho petitioners
[Gazette, Jaly 1] dr. FREDERICK ARPA, LL.D., vice-consul and regig. AVONSIDE ENGINE COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order, dated June trar of the Consular Court at Alexandria, has been appointed
25, Fry, J., appointed Henry Spain, 1, Gresham bldgs, provision
ally official liquidator. Clarke and Co, Lincoln's inn fields, soliche Judge of her Maj-sty's Court for Tunis.
tors for the petitioner Mr. WILLIAM HENRY GUNNING BAGSHAWE, Q.C., has HORSEA STEAM BRICK AND TILE Works. LIMITED.--V.C. Bacon been appointed Judge of County Courts for Cirouit No. 35,
has, by an order dated June 3, appointed Joseph Hardy, Nortolk
row, Sheffield, to be official liquidator in succession to Mr. Edmond Beales, deceased. Mr. Bagshawe is the son of the late Mr. Henry Ridgard
NEW BRONFLOYD COMPANY LIMITED.-Petition for winding up,
presented July 4, directed to be heard before the M.R on July 16 Bagsbawe, Q.C., formerly judge of the Clerkenwell County Foss and Legg, Abchurch lane, solicitors for the petitioner Court. He was educated at University College, London, VICENZA STEAM TRAMWAY COMPANY LIMITED.--Petition for wind: and graduated B.A. at the University of London in 1843. ing up, presented June 29, directed to be heard before V.0. Em He was called to the bar at the Middle Temple in
on July 15. Foss and Legs, Abchurch lane, solicitors for me
petitioner Michaelmas Term, 1848, and he became a Queen's Counsel
[Gaseite, July 5.1
LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL.