« PreviousContinue »
promise to the ear while it broke it to tbe, hope. Power L.JJ.) held that the case was governed by the decision of the was given to the grantees in their absolute discretion at any Court of Appeal in Martin v. Bannister (28 W. R. 143, time without any notice to take possession of the property, L. R. 4 Q. B. D. 491), that a county court has power to im. and they might thus set at nought entirely the agreement for prison for disobedience to an injunction restraining the for beorance, and treat as a nullity the contract for redemp commission of a nuisance. In that case it was held that the tion on a certain day. There was really no forbearance at all power existed for the purpose of enforcing obedience to a and therefore no fresh equivalent for the deed. And, as to final judgment, but there was nothing to limit the provisions the goodwill of the hotel, the debtor had done all that he of section 89 to a final judgment; they applied equally to could do to assign it to the grantees. It was in evidence any order made in the course of an action.-SOLICITORS, tbat the lease of the hotel without the goodwill and the licences | G. L. P. Eyre & Co. would be worthless, and therefore the £500 paid by the pur. chaser of the lease really represented the value of the goodwill, and if the deed was valid the grantees would have been COLLISION IN RIVER THAMES — THAMES NAVIGATION entitled to the whole of the proceeds of the sale of the lease. Rules (MARCH, 1880), RR. 22, 23.-In a case of The Libra, There was, therefore, no exception from the deed, and it before the Court of Appeal on the 19th inst., & question was void as against the trustee in the liquidation. COTTON, arose on the construction of roles 22 and 23 of the 'Thames L.J., said that Ex parte Punnett was distinguishable beausé Navigation Rules of March, 1880. Rule 22 provides that there had been no dealing with the goodwill before the sale of “when two steam vessels proceeding in opposite directions, the public-house, and in such a case a sale of the public. the one up and the other down the river, are approaching house might well, and indeed did, carry with it the goodwill one another so as to involve risk of collision, they shall of the businesg.-SOLICITORS, Hamlin & Grammer; H. B. pass one another port side to port side,” And by rule 23, Clarke & Son.
at steam vessels navigating against the tide shall, before
rounding the following points-viz. (inter alia) Tilbury NessEASEMENT-PRESCRIPTION ACT (2 & 3 WILL. 4, c. 71),
ease their engines, and wait until any other vessels rounding S. 8-COMPUTATION OF PERIOD OF FORTY YEARS-EXCLUSION
the point with the tide have passed clear.” In the case or LIFE ESTATE_“ PERSON ENTITLED TO ANY REVERSION.”
before the court a collision had taken place off Tilbury Ness
between the steamships Libra and Joseph Ricketts. The - In a case of Laird v. Briggs, before the Court of Appeal on the 26th inst., a question arose upon the construction of
Libra was going down the river on the north shore against section 8 of the Prescription Act, which provides that,
tide; The Joseph Ricketts was coming up with the tide. The “ when any land or water upon, over, or from wbich any
Libra starboarded her helm, and it was contended that sbe such way or other couvenient watercourse or use of water
was justified by rule 23. The Joseph Ricketts had ported her shall have been, or shall be enjoyed or derived, shall have
helm, and it was contended that she was justified by rule 22. been, or shall be held under or by virtue of any term of lite,
The court (JES8EL, M. R., and BRETT, and COTTON, L.JJ.), or any term of years exceeding three years from the granting
affirming the decision of Sir R. Phillimore, held that The thereof, the time of the enjoyment of any such way or otber
Libra was to blame for the collision.-SOLICITORS, W. Batmatter as herein last before mentioned, during the continuance
ham ; T. Cooper. of such term, sball be excluded in the computation of the said period of forty years, in case the claim shall, within
PRACTICE—DIVORCE Suit-CostS OF Wife's UNSUCthree years next after the end or sooner determination of such /
CESSFUL DEFENCE-AMOUNT PAYABLE BY HUSBAND-RULES term, be resisted by any person entitled to any reversion
OF DIVORCE COURT OF DECEMBER, 1865, RR. 158, 159,expectant on the determination thereof." It was decided by
In a case of Robertson v. Robertson, before the Court of Fry, J. (29 W. R. 197, L. R. 16 Ch. D. 440) that the words
Appeal on the 19th inst., a question arose as to the correct. “ any person entitled to any reversion expectant on the
ness of the practice which has prevailed for many years, determination” of a life estate, are not limited to an owner
first in the Divorce Court, and subsequently in the Divorce of the whole reversion, but include a teoant at will to such
Division, in fixing the amount to be paid by a husan owner, and consequently that, if within three years after
band for the costs of his wife's unaccessful defence to a the determination of a lise estate in land, an action is
suit for a divorce instituted by him. Rule 158 of the Rules brought by a tenant at will to the reversioner against the
of December, 1865, provides for the ascertaining by the claimant by virtue of an agreement with the tenant for life |
registrar (after directions have been given as to the mode of of an easement over the land, the term of the tenancy for
trial), wbat is a sufficient sum of money to be paid into the life is to be excluded from the computation of the period of
registry, or what is a sufficient security to be given by the husforty years. In the Court of Appeal it became unnecessary
band to cover the costs of the wife of and incidental to the actually to decide the point, because the court (JESSEL, M.R.,
trial of the cause. And rule 159 provides that, when on the and BRETT and COTTON, L.JJ.) allowed an amendment of
hearing or trial the decision or verdict is against the wife, the pleadings, the effect of which was to introduce some facts
"no costs of the wife of and incidental to such hearing or which were not before Fry, J. But the court said that the
trial shall be allowed as against the husband, except such as question of the construction of the section was a very difficult
shall be applied for and ordered to be allowed by the judge one, and one upon which, even if it had been fully argued
ordinary at the time of such hearing or trial." In Robert. before them, they should not wish to express an opinion,
son v. Robertson the President of the Divorce Division made without mature consideration. They must not be supposed
a decree nisi for a divorce against the wife on the ground of to agree with the decision of Fry, J., but the question must
her adultery, and ordered that the costs incurred by the rebe considered as fully open to discussion, notwithstand
spondent (the wife) should be paid, “but not exceeding the ing his decision.-SOLICITORS, Remnant, Penley, a Grubbe ;
amount paid into court or secured by the petitioner (the Harrisons.
hasband) for the purpose.” This order, it appeared, was in
the form always adopted in such cases, the practice having been COUNTY COURT-JURISDICTION-ORDER FOR PRODUCTION | so sectled at the time when Sir C. Cresswell was the judge OF DOCUMENTS-POWER TO COMMIT FOR DISOBEDIENCE- ordinary. The amount at which the wife's costs had been JUDICATURE ACT, 1873, 8. 89.-In a case of Richards v. l estimated, and for which the husband had been ordered to Cullerne, before the Court of Appeal on the 27th inst., the give security, was £370 ; her costs when taxed amounted question arose whether the judge of a county court has power to nearly double tbat sum. She appealed from the de. to commit for contempt for disobedience to an order for the cree, and also contended that the excess of her costs above production of documents. The question arose upon the the £370 ought to be paid by the husband. The court construction of section 89 of the Judicature Act of 1873, (JESSEL, M.R., and Brett and COTTON, L.JJ.) affirmed the whicb provides that “every inferior court which now has, decree on the merits, but they held that the husband or which may after the passing of this Act have, jurisdictions ought to have been ordered to pay the whole of the reasonin equity, or at law and in equity, and in admiralty respec able costs of the wife, and that his liability ought not to tively, shall, as regards all causes of action within its juris- | have been limited to the estimate made before the trial, Tbeir diction for the time being, have power to grant, and shall lordships were of opinion that the practice had not been in grant, in any proceeding before such court, sach relief, dis, accordance with rule 159. JESSEL, M.R., said that, tress, or remedy, or combination of remedies, either absolute according to the practice of the old ecclesiastical coart, the or conditional, in as full and ample a manner as might and order was to tax and pay the whole of the wife's costs onght to be done in the like case by the High Court of Jus. before the hearing, without limiting them to any sum tice.” The court (JESSEL, M.R., and BRETT and COTTON, 1 secured or deposited by the husband, and his lordship
thought that was a very proper practice. At that time, all award to be made a rule of court.-SOLICITORS, Morley the evidence was taken in writing, and there was, therefore, no Shirretf. difficulty in taxing the costs before the hearing. But when, under the Divorce Act of 1857, the practice of taking the evi.
NEWSPAPER - TRADE-MARK — NAME-PIRACY- INJCNCdence orally at the trial was adopted, it became impossible to
TION.-Ia a case of Walter v. Head, also before the Master koow beforehand what the costs would be, and, therefore, im
of the Rolls on the 22nd inst., a motion was made to restrain possible to tax them before the trial, and so the practice grev
the defendant from selliag any newspaper under the name up, by a false analogy to the old rule, of estimating the costs
or title of the Times. The defendant had been issuing rebeforeband, and requiring the husband to secare or deposit
prints of old copies of the Times, which were exact facsimiles the amount so estimated, and then, when the costs came to
of the former issues, except the last sheets, upon which the be taxed, limiting them to the sum so secured or deposited
defendant had inserted advertisemnents for bis own profit. in accordance with a mere guess as to the amount which
He had also issued future numbers of the Times as skits, also would actually be required. It was very proper that a hus.
inserting advertisements for profit. The prices of the deband should pay his wife's costs of her defence to a charge of
fendant's issues and those of the plaintiffs were dissimilar, adultery brought by him, because, by the law of England, all
but the name and the device and arms at the commencement her property became his on the marriage, and she might have
of the defendant's issues were exactly the same as the plaisno means of meeting the expenses of her defence. Some
tiffs'. The plaintiffs now moved for an injunction, on the means must be provided for her to carry on her defence to a
ground that the defendant's issues were a colourable imitadivorce suit, and the defence must be conducted by a solicitor
tion of the plaintiffs', and an infringement of their tradewho could only look to the husband for payment for his ser
mark in their name and device. For the defendant it was vices, and who ought not to lose bis remuneration merely be
contended that the plaintiffs had no special property in the cause the defence was unsuccessful. When the defence had
name of the Times, which was used in conjunction with other been fairly and reasonably conducted the solicitor ought to
words by numerous other papers, and further, that the only be paid the full amount of his costs incurred on behalf of
ground upon which the plaintiffs could succeed was that the wife. The Court of Appeal was able to review the de.
the issues of the defendant were calculated to deceive the cision of the President of the Divorce Division, who had not
public into the idea that they were buying those of the exercised any discretion in the matter, but bad merely
plaintiffs', wbich it was submitted they were not. JESSEL, followed the practice which had been established by his pre
M.R., was of opinion that the issues by the defendant were decessors and which he could not well alter. The Court of Appeal were able to alter the practice and to lay down what
an exact copy of the plaintiffs' paper; that the plaintiffs
had a right of property in their name and heading, wbich the appeared to them to be a more just rule. Of course, the
defendant had infringed; and that the defendant had also atjudge would always be able to disallow any unreasonable
tempted to appropriate one of the most profitable of the costs.-SOLICITORS, Waddilove & Nutt; G.S. & A. Brandon.
branches of the plaintiffs' business—their advertisements,
and he must therefore grant the injunction asked for.-SOLI: COMPANY – WINDING UP-ARRANGEMENT-DEBENTURE
CITORS, Soames ; 4. W. Hodgkinson.
WILL-CONSTRUCTION-TRUSTS DECLARED BY REFERENCE. NOVEMBER, 1862, ORD. 46.-In the case of In re Madras Irri
-In a case of Bashford v. Chaplin, before Fry, J., on the gation and Canal Company, before the Master of the Rolls on
26th inst., a testator by his will gave the residue of Lis the 21st inst., a question was raised whether the court would
estate to trustees upon trast to divide the same equally sanction a proposed sale of the undertaking under the Joint
between bis children, and by a codicil be directed that Stock Companies Arrangement Act, 1870, under the follow
his trustees should hold the sum of £2,000, part of the ing circumstances :-A meeting of the debenture holders bad
share of his daughter Eliza, on trust to pay the income been held by the liquidator, pursuant to the Act, to ascertain
thereof to her for her life for her separate use, and after her their wishes as to the proposed sale, and a resolution in
death upon certain trasts for the benefit of her children, favour thereof was declared to be carried by three-fourths in
with an ultimate trust, in case she should leave no chilvalue of the persons present, either in person or by proxy. A dren, for the benefit of the survivors or survivor of the large number, however, of the proxies were given to the
testator's children, and the issue of scoh of them as should liquidator, who was cot himself a debenture holder in the be then dead, leaving issue. And the testator directed his company. A summons was now heard to confirm the sale, trustees to hold the sum of £2,000, part of the share of and the objection was taken that the proxies were invalid. his daughter Catherine, upon trast to pay the income No list of the debenture holders had been settled on the thereof to her for her life for her separate use, and after liquidation. SESSEL, M.R., although he thought under the her death to hold the same " apon such and the like trosta circumstanoes that the 46th rule of the General Orders of as are hereinbefore declared of the sum of £2,000 secured November, 1862, was inapplicable, was still of opinion that for the benefit of my daaghter Eliza, as fally and effect for the purposes of meetings of any particular class of persons, ually as if such trusts were here fully repeated." And proxies could only be given to, and held by, menibers of that the testator directed that his trustees should hold the sum class, and therefore that the proxies given to the official of £2,000, part of the share of his daughter Louisa, and liquidator were invalid, and he directed another meeting of should pay, apply, and dispose of the same, and the income the debenture holders to be held.-SOLICITORS, Ashurst, thereoi, opon such and the like trusts as are hereinbeMorris, Crisp, & Co.; Whittakers & Woolbert ; I. H. Devon. fore declared of the two several sums of £2,000 and shire.
£2,000 secured for the separate use and benefit of my
daughters Eliza and Catherine, as folly and effectpally as PRACTICE-ACTION-REFERENCE TO ARBITRATION-EN
if such trasts were here fully repeated." The dangbter FORCING AWARD--MAKING AWARD A RULE OF COURT.
Eliza was dead, having left issue, and the daughter In two actions of Burrowes v. Forrest and Forrest v. Bur.
Catherine was dead, never having had any issue. The rowes, before the Master of the Rolls on the 22nd inst., a
question was whether the $2,000 of Catherine was to go question arose whetber, in an action where the matters were
upon exactly the same trusts as the £2,000 of Eliza-i.l., referred to an arbitrator, it was necessary, in order to enforce
to the issue of Eliza, or upon trusts corresponding to those the award, to make it a rule of court. In the above action,
declared of Eliza's £2,000, but substituting the name of all matters in difference were referred to an arbitrator, who
Catherine for that of Eliza, the effect of which would be to made his award, whereby, amongst other things, he ordered give it to the survivors of the testator's children, and the the payment of a sum of money to Burrowes by Forrest. issue of such of them as were dead leaving issue. Fry, J., The award had not been made a rule of court. A motion held that that latter oonstruction was the right one. He said was made on behalf of Burrowes for an order enforcing that the word “like” implied that, though there was to be the award, and the point was discussed whether the award similarity, there was not to be identity. There was to be sbould be made a role of court, which it was stated was not some difference, though the testator had not pointed out required at common law when the reference was in an action, distinotly what the difference was to be. It was more JESSEL, M.R., expressing an opinion that it was desirable to reasonable to suppose that the difference was to be in the assimilate the practice of the Chancery and Queen's Bench | fund and the takers rather than in the fand alone, and this Divisions, made the order asked for without requiring the view was confirmed by the subsequent direction as to the
£2,000 of the daughter Louisa, for if the other construc-L WILL - CONSTRUCTION – CHARGE OF Annuity ON tion was adopted, the direction would be to hold her share | PARTICULAR REAL ESTATE-CHARGE OF LEGACIES ON REAL Dpon two inconsistent trusts, the trust declared of Louisa's | EstaTE-PRIORITY.-In & case of Briggs v. George, before £2,000, and the trust declared of Catherine's £2,000-and, Fry, J., on the 26th inst., & testator gave and devised an indeed, Loniga would not even take a life interest in her annuity of £200 to his wife for her life, and he charged it on £2,000.-SOLICITORS, Blachford, Riches, f Co.; T. Fortune; his freehold estate at H. And he directed that his wife should Bolton, Robbins, & Busk,
have all such powers and remedies for obtaining payment of the annuity, and all arrears thereof, as landlords have for
obtaining payment of rent. And he declared that the TRUSTEE-BREACH OF TRUST- LIABILITY TO MAKE benefits thus conferred on his wife should be taken in full Good CORPUS OF TRUST ESTATE RECEIVED BY TENANT FOR satisfaction of all dower and thirds to which she might be LIFE-ACCRETION TO ESTATE-NEW SHARES IN COMPANY entitled, in or out of his real and personal estate, or either of ALLOTTED IN RESPECT OF OLD SHARES.-In a case of Briggs them. And he gave two sums of £6,000 to trustees upon v. Massey, before Fry, J., on the 25th inst., & question arose certain trusts, and directed that these suus should be paid as to the extent of the liability of a trustee to make good out of his personal estate, but in case his personal estate part of the trust estate which, through his negligence, the should be insufficient, he charged his real estate with the husband of the tenant for life had been allowed to receive. payment of the deficiency. And he devised his real estate at By a marriage settlement, the residue of the estate of a H., charged with the payment of the annuity to his wife, and testator, to which the wife was entitled, subject to the life all other his real estate to his son in fee. The personal estate of the testator's widow, was assigned to the trustees estate proved insufficient, and the proceeds of sale of the real on trust for the wife for her life, with remainder to the estate were insufficient for the payment of the annuity and the husband for his life, with remainder to the children of the two legacies of £6,000 in full, and the question arose whether marriage. The wife was the surviving executrix of the the annuity was entitled to priority in respeot of the proceeds testator, and the husband, availing himself of this cir. of sale of the estate at H., on which it was charged. cumstance, sold some leasehold estate of the testator, and Fry, J., held that the annuity was entitled to priority. He some other parts of his personal estate, and appropriated said that it was in the nature of a demonstrative legacythe proceeds to his own use. Also, after the death of SOLICITORS, Few & Co. the widow, some shares in a company, which formed part of the testator's estate, were transferred from the Dames of the executors into the name of the husband alone. After this, some new shares were allotted by the company
SOCIETIES. to, and accepted by, him in respect of the old ones, and he paid up the calls on the new shares in full. He afterwards mortgaged the shares, new and old, to secure an advance WORCESTER AND WORCESTERSHIRE LAW made to him by a person who had no notice
SOCIETY, of the trust. Å decree having been made de. olaring that the surviving trustee of the settlement was
A general half-yearly meeting of the above society was liable to make good to the trust estate the amount of the
held on the 21st inst., at the Law Library, present : Mr. T. proceeds of sale of the leasehold property, and all other the
G. Hyde (president), Mr. W. P. Hughes (vice-president), residuary personal estate of the testator received by the hus.
Messrs. H. G. Goldingham, J. Stallard, J. Holyoake, R. P.
Hill, S. M. Beale, G. A. Bird, J. Thompson, T. G. Stallard, band, and the trustee having paid into court the amount of
W. W. A. Tree, F. R. Jeffery, J. Stallard, jun., and W. the proceeds of sale of the leasehold property and of the other personal property (other than the shares in the company)
Allen (hon. soc.). The president having read a letter from the which the trustee had sold, the question arose on further
honorary secretary intimating his intention to resign the
office of honorary secretary, it wae proposed by the president, consideration whether the trustee was liable to account for
seconded by Mr. Goldingham, and carried unanimously, the present market value of the new shares which had been allotted to the husband, or only for the selling value of the
“ That, in accepting the resignation of Mr. Allen, this meetoption to take tbem at the time when they were offered by
ing desires to record its sense of tbe services rendered by him
to the society as their honorary secretary for a period of upthe company. Under the settlement the trustees had no tund which they coald have applied in paying the calls
wards of seventeen years, and the zeal and courtesy with
which he has discharged the duties of the office.” The preon the new shares. Fry, J., held that the trustee was liable to pay the present market value of all the shares, new and
sident then, on behalf of the members of the Worcester and old, but that, if the husband had paid the calls on the new
Worcestershire Law Society, begged Mr. Allen's acceptance
of a handsome silver Queen Anne pattern Jardinière, in reshares out of the proceeds of sale of the leasehold property
| cognition of bis valuable services to the society as their hon. and other personal estate which he had received, the trustee would be entitled to be repaid the amount of the calls so paid
orary secretary for upwards of seventeen years. Mr. Allen
suitably replied, and Mr. F. Ronald Jeffery was afterwards, out of the moneys which he had paid into court, and an in
on the proposition of Mr. H. G. Goldingham, seconded by quiry was directed for this purpose at the risk of the trustee
Mr. R. *P. Hill, unanimously elected honorary secretary. AS to costs.-SOLICITORS, Singleton & Tattershall ; F. W.
Some other general business was transacted, and the meeting Reynolds.
concluded with a vote of thanks to the chairman.
WILL-CONSTRUCTION-LEGACY - VESTING-GIFT OVER IN EVENT OF DEATH OF LEGATEE BEFORE THE “FINAL DIVISION". OF THE TESTATOR'S ESTATE.-In & case of
On the report of the Irish Land Bill on Tuesday, the Spencer v. Duckworth, before Fry, J., on the 25th ingt., a
| Attorney-General for Ireland moved the insertion after testator bad given the residue of big estate on trust to
clanse 44 of a clause enabling the party to a proceeding divide the same equally between four persons, and then
before the Land Commissioners or sub-Commissioners to he declared that, if either of the four legatees sbould die
appear in person, or by a solicitor (but not by a solicitor re. “ before the final division of my estate," he bequeathed
tained as an advocate by such solicitor), or by a barrister, to the share of the trast moneys intended for him or her
conduct the case, subject to the rules from time to time so having died unto his or her children or child in equal
prescribed by the court. The clause having been read the shares if more than one. Two of the legatees died, leaving
second time, Mr. Biggar moved an amendment in it to strike children, more than a year after the death of the testator,
out the words “but not a solicitor retained as an advocate but before the estate had been actually fully realized and
by such first-mentioned solicitor." On a division the amenddivided by the executors. Fry, J., beld that by the “final
ment was lost. Mr. Healy moved an amendment to enable division" of the estate was meant the expiration of the
the court to give its sanction in particular cases to the period of one year from the death of the testator allowed
appearance of a solicitor retained as an advocate by the by law for the payment of legacies, and consequently that
solicitor of a party to any proceeding before the Land
Commission or any sub-Commission. the gift over had not taken effect.-SOLICITORS, Lambert,
General for Ireland opposed the amendment. It would Petch, & Shakespear ; Pritchard, Englefield, g Co.
throw on the court the odium of refusing to give its sanction. On a division the amendment was lost, and the clause was I ordered to be added to the Bill.
COMPANIES. Mr. HENRY WILLIAM ACKRILL, solicitor (of the firm of
WINDING-UP NOTICES. Llewellyn & Ackrill), of Tunstall and Hanley, bas been
Joint STOCK COMPANIES. appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for Staffordshire for
LIMITED IX CHANCERY. taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married | ALFE
ALFRETON AERATED WATER COXPANY LIMITED. -- Petition for
winding up, presented July 13, directed to be heard before th Women.
M.R., on July 30. Satchell and Chapple, Queen st, Cheapside, Mr. Thomas METCALFE BARRON, solicitor, of Darlington,
agents for Harris, Orich, solicitors for the petitioners.
ANGLO.VIRGINIAN FREEHOLD LAXD COMPANY, LIMITED.-Hall, bas been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths
has fixed Tuesday, Aug 2, at 1, at his chambers, for the appointin tbe Supreme Court of Judicature.
ment of an official liquidator. Mr. JAMES VALENTINE BATTISCOMBE, solicitor (of the firm
CAMBRIAN MINING COMPANY, LIMITED.--Petition for winding up,
presented July 20, directed to be heard before Bacon, V.c., ou of Walker & Battiscombe), of 16, Water-lane, Great Tower.
July 30. Gregory, Bishopsgate st Within, solicitor for the petistreet, in the city of London, and of Leytonstone in the tioner. County of Essex) bas been appointed a Perpetual Commis.
LONDON AND PROVINCIAL TRADERS' WHOLESALE STORES, LIMITED
Petition for winding up, presented July 21, directed to be heard sioner for the Cities of London and Westminster, and the before the M.R., on July 30. Maples and Co, Frederick's place, Counties of Middlesex and Essex, for taking the Acknow Old Jewry, solicitors for the petitioner.
zette, July 22.1 ledgments of Married Women.
IMPERIAL UNION ASSURANCE COMPANY, LIMITED. -- Petition for Mr. HENRY THOMAS BROWN, solicitor (of the firm of winding up, presented July 25, directed to be heard before Fry, J., Brown & Rogers), of Chester, has been appointed a
on Aug 5. Godfray, Finsbury pavement, solicitor for the petiti
tioner. Magistrate for that city. Mr. Brown was admitted a soli
INDIAN MAMMOTI GOLD MINES, LIMITED.-The M.R. has, by an citor in 1855.
order dated June 29, appointed George Whiffin, 8, Old Jewry,
be official liquidator. Creditors are required, on or before Novi, Mr. EDMUND KELL BLYTI, solicitor, of 10, St. Swithin'g.
to send their names and addresses to the above. Tuesday, Nov 10, lane, London, E.C., has been appointed a Perpetual Com. | at 12, is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts missioner for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds by and claims.
LONDON AND PARIS DRESS AND MILLINERY AssoCIATION, LIMITED Married Women in and for the Cities of London and
The M.R. has fixed Aug 4 at 12 for the appointment of an official Westminster and the Counties of Middlesex and Surrey. liquidator Mr. MAYNARD BROADHURST, of the Bengal Civil Service,
METROPOLITAN AND SURDURBAN STRAX LAUNDRY COMPANY, LIMI
TED.-The M.R. has, by an order dated May 14, appointed Thomas has been appointed a Judge of the High Court of Judicature Stephen Evans, 6, Bucklersbury, to be official liquidator for the North West Provinces of India, on the resignation
MIDLAND LAND AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION, LIMITED.Bran of Mr. Justice Spankie.
order made by the M.R., dated July 16, it was ordered that the
voluntary winding up of the above corporation be continued. Mr. JOSEPH RICHARDSON DAVIDSON LYNN, solicitor, of Burton and Co, Lincoln's inn fields, solicitors for the petitioner Blyth, has been elected (after a poll), as Coroner for the
ONLLWYN AND DULAIS COLLIERY COMPANY, LIMITED.V.0. Hall
bas fixed Aug 5 at 12, at his chambers, for the appointment of an Southern Division of the County of Northumberland, in official liquidator Bucoession to the late Mr. Lonsdale Maving Cockroft, of SANKEY BROOK AND ASHTON GREEN COLLIER IES COMPAXY, LIMITED Newcastle. Mr. Lynn was admitted a solicitor in 1865.
-Petition for winding up, presented July 23, directed to be heard
before the M.R. on July 30. Sharpe and Co, Bedford row, agents Mr. EVAN MILLER JONES, solicitor, of Leeds, has been for Peace and Co, Wigan, solicitors for the petitioner appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the
SHEFFIELD EQUITABLE BENEFIT BUILDING SOCIETY.-Petition fe
winding up, presented July 25, directed to be heard on Aug Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women for the fore the M.R. Maude, Winchester st bldgs, agents for Webeter West Riding of Yorkshire.
and Styring, Sheffield, solicitors for the petitioners.
SCOTCH BANK LIMITED.-Bacon, V.O., has fixed Thursday, Aug Mr. MAURICE S. RUBINSTEIN, solicitor, of 20, Regent
at 12, at his chambers, for the appointment of an official liquidatar. street, Waterloo-place, has been appointed a Perpetual Com UNITED SERVICE SUPPLY ASSOCIATION, LIMITED.-By an order made missioner for taking Acknowledgments of Married Women by Bacon, V.O., dated July 16, it was ordered that the voluntary in and for the County of Middlesex, and the Cities of London
winding up of the Association be continued. Best and Co, Essex
st, Strand, solicitors for the petitioners. and Westminster.
[Gazette, July 26.] Mr. HENRY LINDLEY WHITE, solicitor, of 7, South
UNLIMITED IX CHANCERY. ampton-street, Bloomsbury, has been appointed a Perpetual
PENARTI, SULLY, AND BARRY RAILWAY COMPANY.-By an order
made by Fry, J., dated July 15, it was ordered that the company Commissioner for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds be wound up. Ingledew and Ince, Fenchurch st, solicitors for te by Married Women for the County of Middlesex, and the petitioners Cities of London and Westminster.
[Gazette, July 26.] COUXTY PALATINE OF LAXCASTKB. ASCROFT, Robinson, AND Wilsox, LIMITED. – The V.C. bas, by sa order, dated July 1, appointed Daniel Philips Davies, 11, Canada
Dock, Liverpool, John Watkin Lumley, 54, Regent rd, Liverpool DISSOLUTIONS OF PARTNERSHIPS.
and Walton Batcheldor, 14, Johnson st, Liverpool, to be orticial MILLER CORBET, JOHN JAMES CORBET, and BASIL BIRCH liquidators. Creditors are required, on or before Aug 17, to send
their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts anni BAGSTER, solicitors, 27, Church-street, Kidderminster, and
claims to the above at 14, Johnson st, Liverpool. Aug 21 at 11 is No. 14, Foregate st, Worcester (Miller, Corbet & Co). June appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and 29. The said Miller and John James Corbet will continue claims to carry on the said business at No. 27, Church-street, Kidder
[Gazette, July 22.7 minster, and 14, Foregate-street, Worcester, under the style
BLACKBURN AND DISTRICT BENEFIT BUILDING SOCIETY.-Petition
for winding up, presented July 23, directed to be heard before the of Miller and J.J. Corbet. The said Basil Birch Bagster V.C., at St George's Hall, Liverpool, on Aug 6. Etty, Lord st, will in future carry on business at Commercial-buildings, Liverpool, solicitor for the petitioner Kidderminster. [Gazette, July 22, 1881.]
[Gazette, July 28.] Thomas WRIGHT BADGER, FREDERICK PARKER RHODES,
FRIENDLY SOCIETIES DISSOLVED.
AGRICULTURAL AND TRADESMEN'S FRIENDLY SOCIETY, Gate ino, and GEORGE THOMAS BARRAS, solicitors, Rotherham, Ford Houses, Bushbury, Stafford, July 18 (Gazette July 22. Sheffield, and Hoyland Nether, Yorkshire (Badger, Rhodes, BLYTH MASTER MARIXERS' MUTUAL ASSURANCE SOCIETY, Dun Cow. & Co.), so far as regards the said George Thomas Barras.
Blyth, Northumberland. July 23
FESTINIOG BENEVOLENT Society, Vain st, Festiniog, Merioneth.
[Gazette July 23.) said Thomas Wright Badger and Frederick Parker Rbodes.
FREDERICK JAMES CHESTEP and EDWARD CHESTER, solicitors, 86, Newington Butts (Henry Frederick and Edward Chester). July 13,
The Western Jurist thus reports a banquet of the Iowa State
Bar Association :-“ After the appetites of a hungry profes. EDWARD COLNETT SPICKETT and JOHN EDWARD PRICE,
sion were sufficiently appeaged, order was secured, and the first solicitors, Pontypridd. July 23. The said parties will
| toast proposed was : The judge, his duties and pleasures.continue to practise separately as solicitors at Pontypridd.
| Hon. Geo. W. McCrary. And then followed : Good diges. [Gazette, July 26, 1881.] tion : its compatibility with a lawyer's conscience-Hon.
N. M. Hubbard ; The Itinerant Bar.-Hon. Joseph Knapp The Lawyer in Politics.-Hon. H. A. Trimble ; Our Wives and those that are to be.-Col. D. B. Henderson."
BILLS READ A THIRD TIME.
PRIVATE BILLS.-Earl of Hardwicke's Estate, Redcastle and Farradale Estates, Sectional or Block Buildings
Incumbents of Benefices Loans Extension.
JULY 25.--BILLS READ A SECOND TIME. 27th ult. Mr. Hart was born in 1808, and was admitted a
PRIVATE BILLS.-Croker's Estate, Bagot Estate. solicitor in 1829. He commenced his professional career at
Alsager Chapel (Marriages), Petroleum (Hawking). Maidstone, but a few years later he removed to Folkestone
BILLS READ A THIRD TIME. (his native town), where he continued to practise until
PRIVATE BILL8.—Copland's Patent, Carmarthen and his death. Mr. Hart was a perpetual commissioner for
JULY 26. BILL IN COMMITTEE. the county of Kent, and he had a most extensive private
Petroleum (Hawking). practice. He was for some time a member of the
BILL READ A THIRD TIME, Folkestone Town Council, and he was elected mayor of the
Metropolitan Board of Works (Money). borough in 1851. He was soon afterwards elected clerk to
JULY 27.-BILL IN COMMITTEE. the borough magistrates, and, after resigning that office, he
Publio Works Loans. was placed in the commission of the peace for the borough.
BILL READ A THIRD TIME He was elected vestry clerk of the parish of Folkestone in Alkali Works Regulation. 1849, and be filled that office until the early part of
BILLS WITHDRAWN. this year. Mr. Hart was for many years agent for the County Courts, Vivisection Abolition. Liberal party in the borough and county, and he was an active supporter of all schemes that were calculated to develop the interests and add to the health and prosperity of Folkestone. He was buried at the Folkestone Cemetery on the 2nd inst. The Town Council have passed a vote expressive of condolence with the family of the deceased.
CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY.
LAST DAY OF PROOF.
NES, Aberystwith, Cardigan, Gent. Sept 1. Jones v Atwood, V.0. Hall. Atwood, Aberystwith
CLEASBY, ANTHONY, Sir Penmoyre, Brecon, Knight. A Craven-street, on the 18th ult., after a painful illness. Mr. Cleasby v Cleasby,'v.C. Hall. Hill'and Co. oid Broad st Callaghan was born in the south of Ireland in 1824. He FENSOM, RICHARD, Caddington, Bedford, Farmer. Aug 31. Lockwas engaged early in life as a newspaper reporter and corres.
hart v Fensom, Fry, J. Wetherfield, Gresham bldgs, Basinghall pondent, and in Michaelmas Term, 1862, he was called to Hindsox, Isaac, Kirkby Lonsdale, Westmoreland, Wine Merchant. the bar at the Middle Temple. He practised only in the Aug 31. Bell y Greenbank, Fry, J. Pearson, Kirkby Lonsdale Probate and Divorce Court, where he was for many years
HOLLIDAY, LOUISA, Witney, Oxford, July 26. Saltmarsh V Holli.
day, V.O. Hall. Boyle, Mecklenburgh sq the reporter for the Times. He was also a parliamentary
JONES, DANIEL, Broughton, Denbigh, Grocer. Aug 27. Beirne v reporter in the House of Lords, on the staff of the Morning Jones, V.C. Bacon. Hughes, Wrexham Post. Mr. Callagban had occasionally sat as deputy judge LEVIN, EPHRAIM, Hamilton ter, Esq. Sept 1. Levin v Levin, M.R.
Emanuel, Finsbury circus of the Lambeth County Court. He had suffered for several
MELLOR, BENJAMIN, Stainland, Halifax, Woollen Manufacturer. months from a painful disease of the liver, but he remained Oct 1. Mellor v Schofield, V.C. Hall. Wavell, Halifax at work almost to the last. He was a man of most amiable
Gazette, July 12.] and genial disposition, and his funeral at the Roman Catholio BARON, WILLIAM MACROFT, Aveley, Essex. Sept 1. Rose v Pudney' Cemetery, Kensal Green, on the 21st ult., was attended by
V.C. Hall. Wilkinson and Drew, Bermondsey st, Bermondsey
JONES, DAVID, Dyff ynarth, Cardigan, Gent. Oct 1. Jones V a large number of professional friends. Mr. Callaghan was
Jenkins, V.0. Hal. Hughes and Sons, Aberystwith unmarried.
LUCKHURST, ALFRED, Uckfield, Sussex, Brewer. Oct 1. Luckhurst
v Luckhurst, V.C. Hall. Hillman, Lewes STUDDY, HENRY, jun, Ridgeway, Llawhaden, Pembroke, Esq. Sept
1. Phillips v Summers, Fry, J. Lascelles, Narberth WALROND, Right Hon. Lady JANET, Cullompton, Devon. Aug 31. Rooper v Walrond, M.R. "Willcocks, Gt George st, Westminster
Gazette, July 15.]
An alleged fraud on the Inland Revenue has been recently PRIVATE BILLS.—Southport and Cheshire Lines Exten.
investigated in the Dublin Police Court. Mr. Thomas sion, Metropolitan Bridges.
Colclough, a gentleman who, occupied the position of stamp Supreme Court of Judicature.
distributor to the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court * JULY 25.-BILL READ A SECOND TIME.
of Justice, was charged with having made and sold forged PRIVATE BILL.-Teign Valley Railway.
law stamps. It appeared from the evidence that Mr. ColBILL READ A THIRD TIME.
clough had been appointed stamp distributor in 1869, and PRIVATE BILL.-Severn Navigation.
that the frauds commenced so early as 1871. Suspicion was BILL READ A FIRST TIME.
first aroused by an accidental circumstance. A solicitor's Bill to amend the Patriotio Fund Act, 1867, and to
clerk having purchased a form bearing three embossed make further provision respecting certain Funds ad.
stamps of tbe value of five shillings each, was told at the ministered by the same Commissioners as the Patriotio
Registry of Deeds Office that it required another five shilling Fond (Earl of Northbrook).
stamp, and in order to get this attached he went to the JULY 26.-BILLS KEAD A SECOND TIME. Stamp Office at the Custom House, and immediately on the British Honduras (Court of Appeal), Pedlars' Certifioates,
presentation of the form there it was discovered that the Metallic Mines (Gadpowder).
stamps already on the form were forgeries. All the forms BILL READ A THIRD TIME.
used in the Common Pleas, Exchequer, and Queen's Bench PRIVATE BILL.-Central Norfolk Railway (Lyon and
Divisions are the same, and are printed by the same printer, Fakenham Railway).
there being a siight distinguishing mark to show for which division they are intended, and some of the forms sold by the
prisoner were only supplied to him in June last; while they HOUSE OF COMMONS.
purported to bear stamps dated the month before. When JULY 21.-BILL READ A THIRD TIME. the detectives went to prisoner's office they found a handPRIVATE BILL.-Mar Valley Drainage.
press, which is supposed to have been used in the forgery and JULY 22.-BILLS IN COMMITTEE.
& large number of forged stamps, which had been torn off the Metropolitan Board of Works (Money), Public Works | forms. It also appeared that he had not purchased, until Loans (Advances).
| April, during the present year, any embossed stamps,