were other societies who felt it their duty to meet quarterly, and he had noticed that with regard to one of these, Mr. Clabon-for whom they had all the highest respect was always regular in his attendance at their meetings which were held in the evening. He hoped that the members of the council would not object to sacrifice an evening now and then for the good of the members. There should be two meetings in January and April, in addition to those already held in July and October, which would make four quarterly meetings. He did not ask the council to go to the trouble of presenting a report at each of these meetings, but he thought they could very well send round a short circular stating the main points which required to be considered. He was not wedded to a particular hour. Some of the members in the country had written to him suggesting five o'clock, and he was quite willing to leave this as a question of detail in the hands of the council. All he asked was that the hour should not be in the middle of the working day, for it was the opinions of the persons actually at work in the business of the profession which were the most valuable. Mr. DALTON MILLER, in seconding the amendment, remarked that the council were appointed by the members, and they ought to be acquainted with the opinion of the members, or they would not carry out their wishes. Mr. J. W. PROUDFOOT considered it very necessary that they should meet more frequently, that they might have an opportunity of representing, in a proper manner, the grievances solicitors had to contend with. The way in which cases were disposed of-he would not say tried-was most unsatisfactory. Under present arrangements, with the courts in so many different places, it was impossible to bring cases properly before the juries. They ought to have more frequent opportunities of bringing these matters before the council, that they might be remedied. Mr. LAKE, speaking as a member of the society and not as one of the council, was personally quite in favour of the motion, and that other meetings should be held than those it was customary to have at present. He was quite in favour of holding quarterly meetings if the society thought it right to do so, but he must object, in the strongest manner, to the hour which had been suggested, not on the ground of mere individual convenience, because he was sure that no member of the council would like to put that forward as a reason, but on the ground that the greater number of the members lived out of town, and he thought a meeting at that hour would not bring more than twenty-five gentlemen together. He would vote against the motion for the purpose of afterwards bringing forward a similar motion, but omitting the hour of meeting, and leaving it to the council to call it for such an hour as they should think fit. Mr. F. R. PARKER had been quite opposed to the motion, but Mr. Munton had at least convinced him that the question was worthy of consideration. He suggested that Mr. Munton should so frame bis resolution as to make it a request to the council, or to the committee which was to be appointed, to take it into consideration. He thought it would then be passed without any division. He deprecated, however, the arriving at any definite conclusion in so small a meeting. Mr. T. H. BOLTON hoped the motion would be passed. It was all nonsense to talk of recommending the matter to the serious consideration of the council, but there was no wish to fetter their hands, and the members only asked for an oppor tunity of bringing forward subjects of interest to the general profession. He thought two o'clock as convenient a time as any for the meeting. He was sure seven o'clock would prevent a great many from coming, and thought that the question of the time should be left to the good sense and judgment of the council. Mr. J. L. TOURLE had always noticed a great difference of opinion between the council and the members at these meetings, so much so that many were quite disheartened, and refrained from making suggestions on account of that great body of power which they saw before them. He thought they should meet frequently and discuss their grievances, and there was plenty of opportunity for reform. Mr. RUBENSTEIN wished for more opportunities of meeting the council, and thought two o'clock an inconvenient time. Many of the members attended at great personal inconvenience, which would not be the case if the meetings were held in the evening. Mr. MUNTON, with the permission of the meeting, altered the amendment to the following:-" That, in the opinion of this meeting, it would be desirable that, in addition to the afternoon annual business meeting in July, two meetings should be held in the months of January and April respectively, and that such meetings take place at such an hour as the council may appoint." Mr. PAINE said the chairman wished it to be known that the council had no indisposition to meet the members as often as they desired. Time was, of course, of consequence to all of them, and not more to the council than to the members. They all attended at much inconvenience to themselves, and the council bestowed a good deal of their time, as wisely as they could, for the benefit of the members. The meeting bad, he thought, been wise in leaving the hour of meeting to the council, whose purpose would not be answered if an hour were fixed at which members I could not attend. This would merely be to throw the decisions into the hands of a few who would take the trouble to be present. The CHAIRMAN observed that the time of one meeting need not regulate that of another. The CHAIRMAN put the amendment as altered, which was carried unanimously. Mr. FRANCIS MILLER moved, "That the council be requested to hold the half-yearly meeting of the society in the City of London." He thought that the January meeting should be held in the City, which would be a very great con venience to a large number of, the members of the society who had offices in the City, and were desirous of attending these meetings. Many of those who had not hitherto attended would do so if a meeting were held in the City. Mr. KIMBER seconded the motion. Mr. BOLTON thought that if a man would not take the trouble to come to the hall he would not attend these meetings under any circumstances. At the suggestion of Mr. MUNTON, Mr. MILLER withdrew the motion, as his only desire was to consult the general convenience of the members. Mr. KIMBER moved: "That a committee be chosen from the members of the society for the purpose of recom zation and functions of the society so as to make it more mending what changes might be beneficial in the organi useful to the public and the members, and more reprelarge; and that such committee consist of the following sentative of the wishes and interests of the profession at gentlemen:-Mr. Rubenstein, Mr. Hanhart, Mr. Collings, Mr. Joseph Mote, Mr. Francis Miller, Mr. Fox, Mr. Munton, Mr. Bolton, and himself." He did not propose to say anything in support of his resolution, but would content himself with reading the words of the report, as follows::-"The council are now awaiting the report of the committee, and, according to their promise, will send general meeting to consider it. It was proposed at a a copy to every member of the society, and call a special meeting held in May that an outside committee should be formed to make suggestions before the special general meeting should be held. The council assent with pleasure to this, and suggest that at the general meeting a committee of this character be appointed, and that it consist of some of the members who have taken part in the debates, with any additions that may be suggested." Mr. HANHART seconded the motion. Mr. LAKE would like to know whether Mr. Kimber had read the extract from the report as supporting or opposing his resolution? In his opinion it distinctly opposed it, as the report suggested one thing, and the resolution something totally different. It was one thing for the council to suggest that there should be a committee appointed for the purpose of making "suggestions before the special general meeting should be held," but quite a different thing to have a committee for the purpose suggested by Mr. Kimber. It appeared to him to be a vote of censure on the council. It would also be necessary to have a new charter altering the constitution of the society, and what good could come from the appointment of a committee of investigation without giving them power to see books or consult officials? What good would they do by coming to Chancery-lane and asking questions? Speaking as a member of the council, and considering the motion as & vote of censure on them, he for one would not assist the committee in the slightest degree. Mr. Kimber could not be trying to take in the society, but he was using a very disingenuous argument in saying the council intended to appoint a committee for the purpose he suggested. Mr.KEEN said that he was the parent of the proposition for appointing the special committee, but he only intended it to be appointed in very special circumstances. He did not think any alteration in the organiza ion of the society was required, and if the members felt very strongly upon any particular point they had nothing further to do than to submit their views to writing. He thought that if the special committee were appointed, and certain resolutions and suggestions were put into writing, they would be of very great assistance to the council. But he must disown the way in which Mr. Kimber had amplified the suggestion for a special committee under special circumstances. He thought that if a special committee were always sitting it would be found to be as great an evil to do too much as to do too little. Mr. FRANCIS MILLER observed that had he not thought that the council intended in pursuance of their report to move a resolution appointing a special committee, he would have given notice to the effect. Mr. PAINE stated that from certain inquiries which had been made by Mr. Clabon, the late president, after the report had been printed, he was led to the belief that the report would never be made public, and if that had been the case and the judges made rules, what would have been the use of the committee? He agreed with Mr. Lake that the motion was a vote of censure. The PRESIDENT read an extract from the SOLICITORS' JOURNAL as follows:-" There is no foundation for the doubt which has recently been expressed with regard to the publication of the report of the Legal Procedure Committee. Both the Lord Chancellor in the one House and the Attorney-General in the other have promised to lay it on the table. With regard to the suggestion that the judges will make rules based on the report before it is published, we may point out that as all the members of the Rule Committee of Judges (with one exception) are away on circuit, and the long vacation will commence before their return, there is no prospect of any meeting of the committee being held to consider any proposal which may be made." Mr. KEEN suggested that it was quite open to Mr. Kimber or any other gentleman to move the committee to be appointed. Mr. KIMBER asked whether he was to understand that the council, now they knew the report was to be published, still intended to call this special general meeting before November? The PRESIDENT answered that the council had pledged themselves to circulate the report as soon as it should be published, and to call a meeting. Mr. KIMBER.-At what time do you propose to appoint this committee? Mr. LAKE.-Not at all. It was never suggested. Mr. W. MELMOTH WALTERS said the idea was that the members of the society generally should concur with the council in discussing the question, and that they should appoint their committee. If the council nominated the members, it would be said it was a packed committee. The council wished to work with the members, and if they named their men the council would meet them with pleasure. Mr. KIMBER.-That is all I want. Mr. HANHART said that Mr. Kimber's motion had been brought before them before the meeting was held at which Mr. Keen had made the proposition. The motion was put in the paper when they came to the first of the meetings in May, therefore there ought not to have been any confusion what. ever between the two committees. His own reasons for the formation of the committee had now disappeared, because at the two meetings which had been held they had discussed so many questions, and the council had been so effectually put in possession of the views of the members on many subjects, that the necessity of a committee for the purpose of recommending what changes might be beneficial, was not now so necessary. The motion did not, however, appear to him in any way a slur upon the council. Surely the council did not suggest that the organization of the society was perfect in every way, and that it was not possible for any of the members to make any suggestions or appoint any committee that could be of some service. It did appear to him that there were many things concerning the society which could be improved. In the beginning of the report the council referred with satisfaction to the in creasing strength of the society, "which showed a growing desire on the part of solicitors to aid in the performance of the functions which the society was, on its establishment, intended to fulfil, as distinguished from the idea-too prevalent in former years-that membership was advantageous only in the sense of conferring some mere personal convenience or benefit on those who joined the ranks of the society.' He held that the intention of solicitors in becoming members of the society was to obtain some personal benefit, and that if they did not, the society was not fulfilling all its functions. He was sorry to find in the outside world that he derived no benefit whatever from being a member. He had the pleasure of consulting the library when be could get the books, but he did not find that the membership of the society caused one to be held in any greater respect in the outer world. It appeared to him that changes might be made with the view of making the society more powerful in the world, and its deliberations and resolutions more respected, and to carry more weight with the public than was at present the case. Every solicitor ought to be compelled to be a member of the society, and the society should be the portal through which every man should enter the solicitor branch of the profession. The society should take steps at some future time to bring about an alteration in the law by which the management of the profession should be entirely in its hands. Mr. LERICHE thought there were questions of practice which might be materially improved, and which might well be considered by such a committee as that which was suggested. For example, where a counsel took a brief and did not appear when the case came on for hearing, the council had merely to suggest to the benchers that the fee should invariably be appointments. He would suggest that Mr. Kimber should returned in such cases, and counsel would attend to their bring his motion forward at the next meeting. It could not well be considered by so small anumber as those present. Mr. MUNTON moved as an amendment that a committee should be appointed similar to that suggested in the report, and. that it should be nominated at the Brighton meeting in October. This would be carrying out the suggestion of the council themselves, and at the same time it would show, both to the members and the outside public, that the society were not letting the matter slip through. Mr. BOLTON would have some little hesitation in serving on a committee armed with such sweeping powers. They had better pass a resolution to appoint a committee in the terms of the report. He would be happy to second the amendment. Mr. PAINE thought the better plan would be to wait for the publication of the report, and the special meeting which would follow. He did not think time would be found at the Brighton meeting to consider it. Mr. T. H. DEVONSHIRE thought the appointment of a committee to overhaul the constitution of the society, and to do they knew not what, would be taking a step in the wrong direction entirely. He did not think the meeting could do better than to adopt the suggestion just made, that the matter should stand over altogether until the long-promised report of the Legal Procedure Committee had been published, and leave it to the council to do what they thought fit in calling the society together that they might have an opportunity of considering it. Mr. BOWER said the motion would be entirely subversive of the council. It was really an inquiry as to whether they had done their work. Mr. P. COLLINGS thought Mr. Kimber was desirous of lending assistance to the council. He knew that they had a deal of work to get through, and that they were interested in looking after the higher interests of the profession; but there were many things which the council could not look after, and a sub-committee ought to be appointed, who could meet at. such times as they chose, and who could suggest to the council certain changes, and it could be for the council to decide whether these were beneficial or otherwise. Not a single communication had been made by the council to the general body of solicitors with regard to any changes or alterations they could suggest-with respect to the bankruptcy law for instance. The council would learn where the shoe pinched, and would find out what changes would be beneficial to the public at large, as well as to the profession. Mr. A. CALKIN LEWIS was opposed to the motion, but hoped the appointment of the committee referred to in the report was only deferred, and that a special meeting would be called in due course. Mr. CHAPMAN HALL remarked that if counsel under took cases, they ought to be compelled to be present when they came on for trial. If solicitors acted as barristers did, they would be struck off the roll, or at least severely censured. Mr. KIMBER said he was quite prepared to withdraw his motion in favour of the amendment. Mr. LAKE strongly objected. It was a vote of censure. Mr. PAINE was sure there would be no time to consider it at the Brighton meeting. Mr. MUNTON observed that he had not proposed discussion, but that the committee should simply be nominated. Mr. KIMBER replied, and said that it was ridiculous to lock upon the motion as a vote of censure. It had been said that it was not the same as that proposed by the council. Prima facie it was not, but what other committee had teen proposed at the meeting in May? When he had proposed to withdraw his motion he had been met by Mr. Lake, who said it was a vote of censure. This was the kind of spirit which had stood in the way of all their reforms. But so far from having intended it to be a vote of censure on the council, he had intended it to be a means of support to them. They met as brethren in one common profession, and he hoped they were able to conduct their meetings with ability, and, he trusted, with courtesy. With the permission of the meeting he would withdraw his motion. A MEMBER Suggested that the committee proposed by the council should now be appointed. Mr. PAINE observed that the state of things which existed when that promise was made no longer obtained. The report had not yet been issued. When it had been it would be circulated amongst the members and the meeting called. Mr. FRANCIS MILLER urged that the report had led everybody to believe that the special committee would be ap. pointed at that meeting. He suggested that the motion for the appointment of the committee come from the council themselves, leaving the nomination to the members. Mr. LAKE said that was exactly what could not be done. It was no part of the business to appoint a committee in order that it might be nominated in another place. Bye-law 11 required that the meeting should only consider the business mentioned in the notice convening it. Mr. F. MILLER moved the adjournment of the meeting. He thought that the appointment of the committee referred to in the report was part of the business. The motion was not seconded. Mr. KIMBER moved the adjournment. They had not nearly finished the business for which the meeting was called. Mr. Fox seconded the motion, which was put to the meeting and negatived. A vote of thanks to the chairman was moved by Mr. P. RICKMAN, seconded by Mr. MUNTON, and carried unanimously. SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION. The usual monthly meeting of the board of directors of this association was held on Wednesday, the 13th inst., at the Law Institution, Chancery-lane, London, the following directors being present: Messrs. Rickman (chairman), Asker (Norwich), Brook, Hedger, Kays, Keen, Pennington, Roscoe, Walters, and Woolbert (Mr. Eiffe, secretary). A sum of £285 was distributed in grants of relief; fifty-one gentlemen were admitted members of the association, and other general business was transacted. At the Auction Mart, on Wednesday last, Messrs. Edwin Fox & Bousfield sold the following shares:-28 £20 original shares in the Epsom Grand Stand at an average of £121 12s. 6d. per share; 18 "New Thirds" (£6 13s. 4d. paid) in the same at an average of £31 63. per share; 50 £100 shares (£10 paid) in the Law Life Assurance Society at an average of £121 12s. 6d. per share; 200 £100 shares (£2 10s. paid) in the Law Fire Assurance Society at an average of £18 per share; 180 £50 shares (£8 paid) in the Legal and General Life Assurance Society at an average of £13 6s. per share; 40 £50 shares (£7 118. 6d. paid) in the London and Provincial Law Assurance Society at an average of £7 15s. per share; and £375 Stock in the United Land Company sold at par-the total proceeds of the sale amounting to £15,848. LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL. INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY. HONOURS EXAMINATION. June, 1881. At the examination for honours of candidates for admission on the roll of solicitors of the Supreme Court, the examination committee recommended the following gentlemen as being entitled to honorary distinction: FIRST CLASS. [In order of Merit.] Ernest Crundwell, who served his clerkship to Mr. George Daniel Warner, of the firm of Messrs. Gorham & Warner, of Tonbridge; and Messrs. Prior, Bigg, Church, & Adams, of London. Henry Martyn Mowll, who served his clerkship to Mr. Worsfold Mowll, of Dover. Robert McLean, who served his clerkship to Messrs. Hall, Son, & Lord, of Manchester; and Messrs. Dangerfield & Blythe, of London. William Jackson Perkins, who served his clerkship to Messrs. Peake, Snow, & Peake, of Sleaford. Samuel Foster Butcher, who served his clerkship to Mr. Joseph Farmer Milne, of the firm of Messrs. Hinde, Milne, & Sudlow, of Manchester. Alfred Dashwood, who served his clerkship to Mr. John Wilson Fardell, of Ryde, Isle of Wight; and Mr. Henry Hope Shakespear, of the firm of Messrs. Lambert, Petch, & Shakespear, of London. SECOND CLASS. [In Alphabetical order.] James Pateshall Bowden, who served his clerkship to Mr. William Norris, of Tenbury, Worcestershire; Messrs. Emmet & Son, and Messrs. Longbourne, Longbourne, & Stevens, of London. George Ernest Branson, who served his clerkship to Mr. Charles A. Branson, of the firm of Messrs. Branson, Son, & Coombe, of Sheffield; and Mr. C. W. Taylor, of London. Charles Robert Hargreaves Hardcastle, LL.B., who served his clerkship to Messrs. Lambert, Petch, & Shakespear, cf London. Walter Richard John Hickman, who served his clerkship to Mr. William Winter, of the firm of Messrs. Winter & Co., of London. James Hislop, who served his clerkship to Mr. Edward George Simpson, of Manchester. Arthur George Hooper, who served his clerkship to Mr. Joseph Stokes, of Dudley. William Lethbridge Kingsford, B. A.. who served his clerkship to Messrs. Murray, Hutchins, & Stirling, of London. Robert Mossop, the younger, who served his clerkship to Mr. Samuel Septimus Mossop, of Long Sutton; and Mr. Charles Mossop, of London. John Neely, who served his clerkship to Mr. George Martin Hughes, of the firm of Messrs. Hughes, Hooker, Buttanshaw, & Thunder, of London. Bird, of the firm of Messrs. Hume, Bird, & Eldridge, of Francis Nunn, who served his clerkship to Mr. John P. London. Thomas Probert Perks, who served his clerkship to Mr. Herbert Russell, of the firm of Messrs. Barnes & Russell, of Lichfield. Frank Adolphus Rowe, who served his clerkship to Mr. Stanley Chapnian, of the firm of Messrs. Brook & Chapman, of London. John Sewell, who served his clerkship to Mr. Ewart Simon Mounsey, of the firm of Messrs. Gray & Mounsey, of London. Alfred Thomas Simpson, who served his clerkship to Messrs. Stone & Simpson, of Tunbridge Wells; Mr. W. Sprott, of Mayfield, Sussex; and Messrs. Collyer-Bristow, Withers, & Russell, of London. Herbert Weston Sheppard Sparkes, who served his clerkship to Mr. William l'ope, jun., of the firm of Messrs. Sparkes & Pope, of Crediton; and Mr. Charles James Daw, of the firm of Messrs. Guscotte, Wadham, & Daw, of London. Kelso Storey, who served his clerkship to Mr. William Moore, of Sunderland, deceased; and Mr. William Dalla Mann, of the firm of Messrs. Moore, Longden, and Mann, of the same place. Charles Edward Taylor, who served his clerkship to Messrs. Masefield & Sons, of Ledbury; and Messrs. Geare & Sɔn, of London. John Toovey, who served his clerkship to Messrs. Damant & Son, of West Cowes; and Messrs. Clarkson, Greenwell, & Wyles, of London. Harry Waddington, who served his clerkship to Mr. John James Waterworth, of Keighley. Samuel Ward, who served his clerkship to Mr. Edward Withinshaw Hollinshead, of Tunstall. THIRD CLASS. [In Alphabetical order.] Thomas Reuben Barlow, who served his clerkship to Mr. Richard Cobbett, of the firm of Messrs. Cobbett, Wheeler, & Cobbett, of Manchester; and Mr. Charles William Townley Yeilding, of London. Anthony Nichol Bowman, who served his clerkship to Mr. John Giles Mounsey, of the firm of Messrs. Mounsey & Co., of Carlisle; and Messrs. Gray & Mounsey, of London. Walter Thomas Curtler, who served his clerkship to Messrs. Curtler & Davis, of Worcester; and Messrs. Bolton, Robbins, & Busk, and Messrs. Thomas White & Sons, of London. Joseph Davies, who served his clerkship to Mr. John Jenkins, of the firm of Messrs. Jenkins & Davies, of Llanidloes, Montgomeryshire. Charles Herbert Dorman, who served his clerkship to Mr. Charles Dorman, of the firm of Messrs. Kingsford, Dorman, & Co., of Lordon. Alexander Arnold Hannay, who served his clerkship to Mr. Alfred James Shepheard, of London. William Henry Heath, who served his clerkship to Mr. Samuel Edward Heath, of Nottingham. Benjamin Hoddinott, B.A., who served his clerkship to Mr. Nehemiah Learoyd, of London. James Joblin, who served bis clerkship to Mr. John George Hargreaves, of Durham. Edward Bellamy Kitson, who served his clerkship to Mr. F. W. Gundry, of Bridport; and Messrs. Surr, Gribble, & Bunton, of London. Charles Lupton, who served his clerkship to Messrs. Dibb, Atkinson, & Braithwaite, of Leeds; and Messrs. Paterson, Snow, & Bloxam, of London. James McDonald, who served his clerkship to Mr. James Parry, of Manchester. Edgar William Mason, who served his clerkship to Mr. Edwin Farrar Mason, of Birmingham. Robert Nevill, who served his clerkship to Mr. Cornelius Thomas Saunders, of the firm of Messrs. Saunders & Bradbury, of Birmingham; and Messrs. Crowder, Anstie, & Vizard, of London. Charles James Prior, who served his clerkship to Messrs. Prior, Bigg, Church, & Adams, of London. Arthur James Sisson, who served his clerkship to Messrs. Birch, Cullimore, & Douglas, of Chester; and Messrs. Merediths, Roberts, & Mills, of London. Herbert Warren, B.A., who served his clerkship to Mr. Alexander Balderston, of London. Henry White, who served his clerkship to Mr. Charles Hall, jun., of Huddersfield. Josiah Whitmore, who served his clerkship to Mr. William Wilkins, of Peterborough. Edward Thomas Rice Wood, who served his clerkship to Mr. Arthur Cheese, of Rhayader, Radnor. The Council of the Incorporated Law Society have accordingly given class certificates and awarded the following prizes of books: To Mr. Crundwell, the prize of the Honorable Society of Clement's-inn. Value 10 guineas. To Mr. Mowl, the prize of the Honorable Society of Clifford's-inn. Value 5 guineas. To Mr. McLean, the prize of the Honorable Society of New-inn. Value 5 guineas. To Mr. Perkins, Mr. Butcher, and Mr. Dashwood, prizes of the Incorporated Law Society. Value 5 guineas each. The council have given class certificates to the candidates in the second and third classes. The number of candidates who attended the examination was 116. THE DANIEL REARDON PRIZE. Pursuant to regulatious made as provided by the deed relating to the above prize, it has been divided into four prizes, one of which will be awarded at each honours examination. The council have accordingly awarded To Mr. Harry Faulkner Brown, the Daniel Reardon Prize for January, 1881. To Mr. Henry James Brown, the Daniel Reardon Prize for April, 1881. To Mr. Ernest Crundwell, the Daniel Reardon Prize for June, 1881. MANCHESTER LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.' The second meeting of the summer session was held on Tuesday, July 5, at the Law Library, Cross-street, Manchester, the chair being occupied by W. H. Holdsworth, Esq. The question for debate was, Ought a free-trade policy to be absolutely maintained by Great Britain towards those countries which adhere to a system of protective duties?" Mr. Butcher. opened the affirmative side of the question, and was followed by Messrs. Rayner, Linell, and Coward; and Messrs. Hislop, Law, Rowland, Norton, and Rycroft argued for the negative. Mr. Freston, who was introduced by the chairman, also spoke on the question in the course of the evening. Mr. Butcher having replied on behalf of the affirmative, the chairman addressed the meeting on the point, and after considering both sides of the question in a very able manner, put it to the meeting, when it was decided in the negative by a majority of six votes. A cordial vote of thanks to the chairman brought the meeting to an end. LEGAL APPOINTMENTS. Mr. ALEXANDER ASHER, advocate, who has been elected. M.P. for the Elgin Boroughs in the Liberal interest, is the second son of the Rev. William Asher, of Inveravon, Banffshire. He was educated at the Elgin Academy, and at the University of Edinburgh, and he was called to the bar in Scotland in 1861. Mr. Asher was an advocate de pute from 1871 till 1874, and at the last general election he unsuccessfully contested the Universities of Glasgow and Aberdeen. Mr. ALFRED WILLIAM COWDELL, solicitor, of Chesterfield, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for Derbyshire for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women Mr. FRANK STANLEY DOBSON, barrister, has been ap-pointed Solicitor-General for the Colony of Victoria in the new administration. Mr. Dobson was called to the bar at the Middle Temple in Michaelmas Term, 1860. Mr. WILLIAM THOMAS HAMLIN, solicitor (of the firm of Hamlin & Grammer), of Gunnersbury, and 7 and 3, Staple. inn, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for iaking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women for the Counties of Middlesex, Surrey, and Kent, and the Cities of London and Westminster. Mr. GEORGE TAYLOR, solicitor, of Scarborough, has been elected Clerk of the Peace for that borough. Mr. Taylor was admitted a solicitor in 1856. COMPANIES. WINDING-UP NOTICES. JOINT STOCK COMPANIES. LIMITED IN CHANCERY. ANGLO-FRENCH UNION BANK, LIMITED.-Petition for continuation of voluntary winding up presented July 6, directed to be heard before V.C. Hall on July 22. Paddison and Co, Castle st,. Holborn, solicitors for the petitioner ANGLO-VIRGINIAN FREEHOLD LAND COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order made by V.C. Hall, dated June 17, it was ordered that the above company be wound up. Rooke and Sons, Lincoln's inn fields, solicitors for the petitioners ARMY AND NAVY PROVISION MARKET, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented July 12, directed to be heard before the M.R. cn July 23. Fowler and Co, Borough High st, solicitors for the petitioners. ARTISTIC COLOR PRINTING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Creditors are required, on or before Sept 30, to send their names and addresses to James Cunliffe, Milner's bldgs, Finsbury pavement. Nov 2 at 11 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims GROSVENOR CO-OPERATIVE STORES, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented July 14, directed to be heard before V.C. Hall on July 29. Sydney, Coleman st, solicitor for the petitioners MANUFACTURERS' FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, LIMITED.-Fry, J., has fixed July 25 at 11 at his chambers for the appointment of an official liquidator TITUS SOMERFIELD AND SON, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented July 11, directed to be heard before the M. R. on July 23. Bower and Cotton, Chancery-lane, agents for Baker, Walsall, solicitor for the petitioner. WHITCHURCH ARD ELLESMERE BANKING COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order made by Hall, V.C., dated July 8, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Cunliffe, Beaumont, and Davenport, Chancery-lane, agents for Churton, Chester, solicitor for the peti tioner | Gazette, July 15.] AVONSIDE ENGINE COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order made by Fry, J., dated July 8, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Clarke, Woodcock, and Ryland, Lincoln's-inn-fields, solicitors for the petitioners. CLIVIGER COTTON SHED COMPANY, LIMITED -The M.R. has, by an order dated June 28, appointed Joshua Rawlinson, Nicholas st, Burnley, to be official liquidator. Creditors are required, on or before Oct 1, to send their names and addresses and the particulars of their debts or claims to the above. Nov 2 at 11 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims COUNTERSLIP SUGAR REFINERY COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order made by Fry, J., dated July 9, it was ordered that the voluntary winding up of the company be continued. Clarke and Co, Lincoln's inn fields, solicitors for the petitioners GREAT WHEAL POLGOOTH, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented July 16, directed to be heard before V.C. Bacon on July 30. Beall and Co, Queen Victoria st, solicitors for the petitioner HORNSEA STEAM BRICK AND TILE WORKS, LIMITED.-Creditors are required on or before Aug 31 to send their names and addresses, and the full particulars of their debts or claims to Joseph Hardy, Norfolk row, Sheffield. Oct 31 at 12 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims. REECE'S PATENT ICE COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented July 18, directed to be heard before V.C. Hall on July 29. Flint and Gardner, St Helen's place, solicitors for the petitioner. RYE VALE DISTILLERIES COMPANY, LIMITED.-V.C. Hall has fixed July 29 at 12 at his chambers, for the appointment of an official liquidator Ar the opening of the assizes for the county of Herts on the 18th inst., Lord Justice Bramwell said he had ascertained that two of the causes entered for trial at these assizes were London cases, and he said at once that he would not try such Cases. In one of these cases the cause of action appeared to have arisen in Red Lion-square, and the parties had no business to send such a cause to be tried at Hertford. Mr. Channell, who was one of the counsel retained in the cause referred to, said that after the cause had been set down for trial an application had been made on behalf of the defendant to one of the masters to change the venue back to London, and the master had referred the application to a judge at chambers, who declined to make any order. Lord Justice Bramwell said that such a cause had no business on the list for trial at Hertford, and masters and judges at chambers must understand that he would not try London cases at the assizes without some special reason. His lord-hip then addressed a special jury that had been sworn, and said it might be as well for him to state that the reason for his coming to this determination was that the assizes were held solely for the purpose of disposing of the business of each particular county, and it was most unfair that the legitimate business should be interfered with by cases being sent down from London to be tried. He was aware that one of the reasons assigned for doing this was that parties could not get their causes tried in London on account of the great pressure of business in the London law courts. He did not believe there was any ground for saying this at the present time, and the real reason was that a certain smart lawyer, seeing that an assiz was to be held at Hertford, entered his cause for trial in the expectation that he would get his harvest quicker; also under the apprehension that the parties might be "silly" enough to come to some amicable arrangement if there was any delay. By taking this course, however, it was necessary to bring all the witnesses down from London, and the expenses, which as everybody knew were quite heavy enough in London, were increased enormously. Parties had no right to bring London causes down for trial at the assizes, and he was determined to adhere to the resolution he had come to with regard to them. CREDITORS' CLAIMS. CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. LAST DAY OF PROOF. DENNIS, JOHN, Baxtergate, Loughborough, Leicester, Milliner. LILLIE, JAMES, Arlington, Chester. July 28. Lillie v Carswell, [Gazette, July 5.] Aug 12. Clarke v Aug 31. Barnes Aug 15. Hill V BARKER, THOMAS, Etwall, Derby, Yeoman. DUNSFORD, THOMAS, Corbyn st, Hornsey. Aug 1. Searle v Duns. ford, V.C. Hall. Learoyd, Albion chbrs, Moorgate st GLADSTONE, HELEN JANE, Mount st, Grosvenor sq. July 29. Gladstone v Bagshawe, V.C. Hall. Fresh fields and Williams, Bank bldgs HAMMON, JOHN, Sekforde st, Clerkenwell, Jeweller. July 28. Kirkham v Hammon, V.C. Hall. Beard and Sons, Basinghall st PHILLIPS, THOMAS, Devizes, Gent. Aug 10- Ingles v Bayes, Fry, J.Meek, Devizes SELLWOOD, WILLIAM, Buckland, Berks, Yeoman. Sept 1. Sellwood v Rixon, Fry, J. Haines, Faringdon THOMAS, BENJAMIN, Wauwen, Swansea, Innkeeper. Aug 9. Thomas v Thomas, M. R. Woods, Swansea TREHANE, WALTER, Exeter, Wine Merchant. Aug 9. Cooper v Trehane, M. R. Ford, Exeter [Gazette, July 8.7 CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. CAP. 25. LAST DAY OF CLAIM. AUSTEN, JAMES WILLIAM, Chatham, Kent, Army Contractor. Aug Mann, Chatham 13. BROUN, CAROLINE, Westmoreland rd, Bayswater. Aug 8. Lawrance and Co, Old Jewry chmbrs BUNCH, ROBERT, Caracas, Republic of Venezuela. Aug 30. Western and Son, Essex st, Strand CARLEY, JOHN, Leeds, Boot and Shoe Manufacturer. Oct 1. Butler and Middlebrook, Leeds CAVE, SUSANNA, Bromley, Kent. Aug 20. Latter and Willett, CLARK, JOBN ROBERT, Beverley, York, Ironmonger. Aug 20. Shepherd and Co, Beverley COUPLAND, CHARLES HENRY, Scarborough, York, Gent. Aug 1. COWLEY, EMMA CORNOCK, Cheniston gdns, Kensington. Aug 13. Birch and Co, Chester DAVIES, MARIA, Carmarthen. Aug 15. Lloyd, Carmarthen DAVIS, JOHN COOPE, Brentwood, Essex, Esq. Aug 15. and Co, New Broad st Hanbury DRY, THOMAS, Gloucester rd, Regent's pk, Esq. Sept 6. Scadding, Gordon st, Gordon sq ELSBY, WILLIAM, Crewe, Chester, Painter. Aug 16. Pointon, Crewe GOLDTHORP, JOHN DODDS, Wakefield, York, Worsted Spinner. Sept 1. Marsden and Co, Wakefield HANCOCK, MARY ANN, Sneinton, Nottingham. Aug 15. Wells and Hind, Nottingham HARTLEY, ROBERT, Padiham, Lancaster, Weaver. Aug 31. Wheeler and Fletcher, Padiham HARVEY, JAMES, Clarendon, Island of Jamaica, Planter. Aug 1. JOHNSON, RALPH, Coundon, Durham. Sept 1. Parker, Bishop Auckland JONES, DAVID, Carmarthen, Draper. Sept 30. Branel White, Car marthen KITELEY, JOSEPH, Kidderminster, Worcester, Esq. Aug 1. Ivens and Morton, Kidderminster |