Page images
PDF
EPUB

North Wales, upon their line, as against the coal traffic of the coal owners of the Forest of Dean, and the court said in their judgment, "If we could see clearly that a scale of charges with reference to distance had been framed with a view to and having the effect of favouring the Ruabon coal traffic and prejudicing the Forest of Dean coal traffic, we should hold it to be an undue prejudice within the Act in accordance with the decision in Re Ransome." The case of Ransome v. Eastern Counties Railway Company (29 L. J. C. P. 329) was a complaint of a similar kind-namely, that the railway company carried coals from Peterborough at a lower rate than they charged for carrying coals from Ipswich to various places on their line, and the court granted an injunction that they should carry coals from Ipswich on equal terms with coals from Peterborough, having due regard to the circumstances, if any, which rendered the costs of conveying in one case less than the costs for conveyance in the other. The only grounds on which the Midland Company claim to be justified in the difference they make between Burton and Newark in rates for carriage are-(1) the inequality in the quantity of the traffic of the two places; (2) the very different conditions under which the traffic is handed over to them at the two places; and (3) the greater weight per truck and the longer distance traversed in the case of Burton traffic as compared with Newark. The total weight of Burton traffic in and out dealt with by the Midland Company in the year ending 31st of May last was 594,000 tons, and of Newark traffic 85,000 tons.

The conveyance of large and small quantities does not cause the same relative amount of trouble or expense. The bulk of the beer from Burton is worked away in full train loads, and the heavier average load per wagon is from 45 to 50 owt. per truck, as against 15 cwt. in the case of Newark. Half the quantity of beer from Newark goes in consignments under 500 lbs. in weight, and the proportion of light loads to full trucks is increased accordingly. There is no complaint that the Newark rates for beer in casks are undue or unreasonable otherwise than relatively to the Burton rates, and, before we can find that the company have contravened the Railway and Canal Trailio Act, we must be satisfied they have no such special advantages from the Burton traffic as to justify them in carrying it at reduced rates. But the considerations to which we have adverted satisfy us that beer from Burton is carried more cheaply than from Newark to an extent sufficient to warrant us in declining to say that the rates at which it is carried are lower as compared with cost of carrying than the rates that the company charge at Newark for the same kind of traffic, and that the difference complained of in the rates for carriage of beer is not justified. We must, however, make an exception as to consignments of beer under 500 lbs. in weight. We see no sufficient reason for small consignments of beer from Burton being charged according to the rate per tou, and from Newark according to the scale for small packages. We are of opinion that if all Burton consignments, whether below or above 500 lbs. in weight, are charged at the tonnage rate, the Newark rates per ton should be similarly applied.

We are of opinion, also, that the considerations which justify the company in carrying beer from Burton at less rates than from Newark are not equally applicable to articles consigned to these places, and that we ought to require the company to carry malt, barley, and hops to Newark on equal terms with the like traffic to Burton. These observations have reference only to the local rates of the Midland Company.. Through rates are governed and affected by a different class of considerations, the several companies interested in them are not at present before us, and we do not mean in any way to prejudice or interfere with them. Bottled beer is carried from Burton at the rate of ale in bulk; at Newark the bottled rates are considerably in excess of the cask rate. Such advantage in favour of Burton does not, for the reasons to which we have referred in connection with the rates on beer in cask, appear to us to amount to a contravention of the Traffic Act. But it is further alleged, and not challenged, that if beer is sent from Burton in cask to any place where Burton brewers have an agency and is there bottled, and the beer so bottled is afterwards consigned from that place to any station on the Midland Railway, it also is conveyed at the Burton rate for ale in cask.

We are of opinion that such an extension of the Burton rates is an undue preference of the Burton trade and should not be continued.

As each side has succeeded upon a material part of the case, we think that justice will best be done by making no order as to costs.

Solicitors for the applicants, Chester, Mayhew, Broome, & Griffiths, for Richardson & Marshall, Bolton.

Solicitors for the respondents, Beale, Marigold, Beale, & Groves.

DORCHESTER COUNTY COURT.

(Before Mr. Serjeant TINDAL ATKINSON, Judge.)

Aug. 9.-Ex parte Denman, In re Foot. Act of bankruptcy-Bills of Sale Act, 1878, s. 8-Consideration -Statement-Fraudulent preference.

His HONOUR, who had reserved the judgment in this case, said: The creditors' trustee in these proceedings of liquida. tion by arrangement, Thomas Isaac Denman, seeks to set aside a bill of sale given by the debtor to three creditors. The two grounds on which it is sought to impeach the valid. ity of the deed are, first, that it is fraudulent and void as against other creditors, it being an assignment substantially of the whole of the debtor's estate, and an act of bankruptcy; and, second, that it is also fraudulent and void, inasmuch as the consideration for which the bill of sale was given is not truly stated as required by the Bills of Sale Act, 1879, section 8. The facts, so far as they are necessary for the deci sion in this case, are that the debtor, Herbert William Foot, has for some years carried on the business of a farmer at Glanvilles Wootton, in Dorset. His farm comprised nearly 400 acres at a rental of £700 a year, and was principally cultivated by him for dairy purposes. At the beginning of October, 1880, the debtor being in arrear with his landlord, a distress for £594 was put in upon his farming stock, which comprised at that time upwards of eighty cows and s number of other cattle. It does not appear when this took place that any other creditor was pressing for payment so that it could be said that, beyond this distress for rent, the debtor was in embarrassed circumstances. To relieve him- self from the landlord's claim the debtor applied to Barwell Bennett and Phillip Foot for assistance, and through their influence with the bank of Messrs. Eliot, Pearce, & Co., an immediate advance of £300 was procured, at that time it being believed that by the payment of this sum the landlord would withdraw from the distress and give time for the payment of the remaining balance. This, however, after receiving the £300, the landlord refused to do; and it became necessary again to have recourse to the bank, and a further advance was procured of £319. The repayment to the bank of the whole sum advanced, £619, was secured by a guarantee given by Barwell Bennett and Phillip Foot. This document is dated the 13th of October, 1880; and in it they severally and jointly guarantee any advance the bank bad made or might make to Herbert William Foot, or for which he then was, or might at any time be, accountable on his current account or otherwise. The first payment of £300 to the debtor was made by the bank on the day following the date of the guaranteenamely, the 14th of October; and the second advance of £319 on the 22nd. The bill of sale, the subject of the present inquiry, was given the following day, the 23rd. At the time it was executed the grantor stood with relation to his indebtedness to the three grantees in this position. To his uncle, Barwell Bennett, he owed a past debt of £14 for money advanced some time before to pay a premium due on a life policy, and he was also liable for the grantor as a surety to the bank of Eliot & Co. for a loan of £200 advanced some years before, and he was further contingently liable for the late advance of £619. To the second grantee, Phillip Foot, the brother, he was indebted in a sum of £250lent in 1875, and also in £40 for a rick of hay sold in the same year. The accumulated interest on the loan of £60, and the compound interest charged on the £40 due on the rick of bay, for the payment of which compound interest I find no agreement or promise was ever made by the grantor, make up a total of past debts to Phillip Foot of £365, and he was also contingently liable at the time of executing the bill of sale as a surety to the bank for £612. With regard to the grantor's sister, Rebecca Burch, the third grantee, she in June, 1872, lent the grantor £400 at four per cent., which sum was unpaid at the time the bill of sale was executed. She bad

not requested the two other grantees, at whose instance she had been made a party to the deed, to make her such party, and her name was used as a grantee without her knowledge or previous assent. The bill of sale having been thus given on the 23rd of October, nothing was done under it until the 1st of December, when, as it alleged by the grantees, hearing that other creditors had been pressing for payment and that a distress was likely to issue for arrears of tithes, a demand was then made by them for the payment of the secured sum of £1,636, and upon a statement made by the grantor that he was unable to pay, they entered under the bill of sale and removed the whole of the farming stock, among which were eighty-four dairy cows and a number of other cattle, leaving five horses upon the farm, one of which was subsequently sold by the grantor, and the remaining four removed from the farm on the morning of the sale, the 14th of December, and sold with the other stock. The amount realized at the sale was £1,559. On the 11th of December, the debtor filed his petition in liquidation; and on the 29th the present trustee was appointed. The unsecured debts amount to £679, with no available assets to meet them. No books containing an account of his dealings or payments have been kept by the debtor, his practice being to enter them at the time in a small pocket-book, and when it was full to destroy it. The bill of sale is in the usual form, and purports to have been made on the 23rd of October, 1880, between Herbert William Foot, the mortgagee of one part, and Barwell Bennett, Phillip Foot, and Rebecca Burch, the mortgagees of the other part, and recites that the mortgagor is indebted to the mortgagees respectively in sums amounting to £1,019, and as to the share of Rebecca Barch in that amount for her sole and separate use; that the landlord of the mortgagor has recently distrained upon the stock and effects of the mortgagor for £594 8s. 6d., and £25 3s. 6d., the costs of the distress, amounting in the whole to £619 128.; that the mortgagor has requested the mortgagees to pay out the distress or advance to the mortgagor the sum of £619 12s. 6d. for that purpose, which the mortgagees have agreed to do upon having the Security hereinafter contained for as well the said sum of £1,019, as for the said sum of £619 128. now advanced, which the mortgagor agreed to give, and the mortgagees have in pursuance of the said agreement paid to the agent of the said landlord the sum of £619 125. in full discharge of the said distress, and the said landlord has withdrawn from possession of the said stock and effects in pursuance of the said sum, and on consideration of the said sum of £1,019, and agreement of the further sum of £619 12s. now advanced to the mortgagor by the mortgagees, he covenants to pay the sum secured on demand, and for the consideration stated assigns to the mortgagees all his crops of grain now growing, or which may hereafter be found upon his farm, and all horses, cows, cattle, carts, farming utensils, hay, straw, and other effects whatsoever which now are or shall at any time hereafter, during the tenancy of the mortgagor, be upon the farm. Upon these facts Mr. Trevor Davies contends, in the first instance, that the bill of sale in question is fraudulent and void as against the trustee, it having been given to secure a past debt, and, by conveying the whole of the debtor's goods without any equivalent, constitutes an act of bankruptcy. In considering this question I am relieved from any difficulty as to the debtor not being a trader by the case of Ex parte Luckes, In re Wood (42 L. J. Bkcy. 21), in which it was held that, if there has been an assignment of all a debtor's available property to a creditor to secure a past debt, it is an act of bankruptcy, whether the debtor is a trader or not. No doubt the fact of parting with the whole of a man's available property to secure a past debt will not constitute an act of bankruptcy if an advance is made by the creditor in good faith, and with the intention of enabling the debtor to carry on his business, and his affairs at the time that such advance is made not being in such an embarrassed state as to exclude the reasonable belief that the advance so made will be sufficient to prevent bankruptcy. But in the present case, at the very outset of the inquiry, a question arises upon the facts proved-namely, was there a real money advance made at all by two of the guarantees? for as to the third, Rebecca Burch, it is not pretended that she was directly or indirectly the means, by becoming a security or otherwise, of obtaining the £619 from the bank, and so far, therefore, as she is concerned,

her debt of £400 is, without request or pressure on her part, secured by the transfer of the debtor's property described in the bill of sale, and it is in my opinion, so far as she is concerned with the bill of sale, a fraudulent preference under the 92nd section of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. With regard to Barwell Bennett and Phillip Foot, the facts show that what was really procured in the shape of a money advance to the debtor from the bank was made by the bank to him, the inducement for granting the loan being his personal liability for the repayment of the money, the ultimate repayment being secured by the guarantee of Barwell Bennett and Phillip Foot. Their liability was, therefore, contingent upon the non-payment There is authority for

of the £612 by the borrower. holding that a surety does not become a creditor of the principal debtor merely by force of the relation between them, although the surety may have made himself liable absolutely to the creditor, and the debtor may have undertaken to indemnify him. Until the surety has actually paid the money his liability is only contingent and uncertain, and hence, under the earlier bankrupt. laws, unless the surety had actually paid the debt before the bankruptcy of the principal he could not prove under the bankruptcy (Robson's Bankruptcy, 215, and the cases there cited). I find no proof in the case before me of any agreement between the grantees and the grantor that the bill of sale was to be given in consideration of their becoming liable to the bank for the £919. It is treated throughout by the three grantees as an absolute advance made by them jointly out of their own moneys. Even had the real fact been stated in the deed, it has been held that a transaction whereby the property is conveyed to secure a surety against liabilities which he had incurred to the particular creditors who may come in, when such surety surety can stop the trade at any moment, is not a case in which the bankrupt receives an equivalent which he can deal with in carrying on his trade if he chooses (per Lord Campbell, C.J., Leake v. Young, 5 Ellis and Blackburn, 965). Had the objection to the bill of sale stood alone upon the contention that it became void by the fraudulent preference given to the past debt of Rebecca Burch, I should have had no hesitation in finding the deed wholly invalid within the 92nd section of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. But, apart from this, looking at all the surrounding facts, I cannot come to any other conclusion than that the sole object of the two other grantees, Barwell Bennett and Phillip Foot, in making themselves parties to procuring the £619 was to obtain, by means of the bill of sale, the possession of the whole of the debtor's estate for one purpose only-namely, to pay themselves the debts owing to them, having at the time no intention of enabling the debtor to carry on his business, or, on the other hand, was there any intention on the part of the debtor to do so. I have carefully considered the numerous authorities which the research and industry of Mr. Fossett Lock, the counsel for the grantees, and Mr. Trevor Davies, the solicitor for the trustee, have brought before me in the course of their able and elaborate arguments in this case, and have been mainly governed in my decision by the cases of Ex parte Greener, In re Vane (43 L. J. Bkey. 76), and Ex parte Ellis, In re Ellis (L. R. 2 Ch. D. 798), in which the rule is stated to be, not whether a further advance is great or small, but whether there

was

a bona fide intention of carrying on the business, the late Lord Justice James observing in the former case, "It was strange that they intended him to carry on his business when they put all their debts into a bill of sale, and within one month take all his property." I find, as I have stated, that no intention of carrying on the business existed in the minds of any of the parties at the time the bill of sale was given, and on these grounds and the authorities cited I hold that the trustee must succeed upon the first motion-namely, that the bill of sale, the subject of this inquiry, is fraudulent and void, and an act of bankruptcy. With regard to the remaining contention, that the bill of sale is invalid on the ground that the recitals are not true in substance, and that the consideration for which it was given is not truly stated, as required by the Bills of Sale Act, 1878, the facts upon which my decision has been given on the first motion are mainly the same as in the second. The 8th section enacts that the bill of sale shall truly set forth the consideration for which it was given; that is, that it must be described according to the real facts, and must not be misleading. I am of

opinion that the third recital set out in the former part of this judgment, which alleges that the grantor requested the grantees to pay out the distress or to advance the sum of £619 128. for the purpose of paying out the distress, upon having the security provided in the dead for as well the sum of £1,019 as the £619 12s. then advanced, is not true-in fact, no request was ever made at any stage of the proceedings to one, at least, of the three mortgagees -namely, Rebecca Burch-to advance or become a party to the advance of £619 alleged to be jointly advanced to the grantor. As far, therefore, as this recital is concerned, it does not state the fact, and is misleading. But the more important feature of this part of the case arises upon the statement of the consideration. The deed sets out that in pursuance of the said agreement, and in consideration of the sum of £1,019 so owing from the grantor, and cf the further sum of £619 12s. now advanced by the grantees, the grantor transfers all his arming stock and effects, as well present as future. The first observation that occurs in this place is what were the facts as to the £619 said to be " now advanced." I have already pointed out that the written guarantee of the two grantees, Barwell Bennett and Phillip Foot, given by them to the bank on the 13th of October to secure the repayment of the £619 was money not advanced by the bank to them, but by the terms of the document to the grantor, Herbert William Foot. This document speaks for itself; it creates a liability on the borrower to repay the sum borrowed, and an obligation upon the sureties to pay in the event of his failure to do so. The statement that the £619 was advanced by the three grantees was under no possible circumstances true in fact. It was not true as regards Rebecca Burch being a party to any advance, and not true as regards the two others, the money having been borrowed from the bank by the grantor himself. The reason stated in the earlier part of my judg ment for pronouncing the bill of sale fraudulent and void apply with equal force to this part of the case, and it is not necessary to add anything more. The question raised on the second motion is one of fact and construction—namely, is the consideration truly set out when it states that the equivalent for the bill of sale was given to secure the payments of past debts, was the money then advanced by the three grantees, jointly, when in truth, if advanced at all, it was by two of them only, or can it be said to be truly stated that it was money advanced by the grantees, when, if anything, it was procured by them from a third party by means of their having become sureties for its due repayment, and becoming a debt to them on the part of the borrower by their discharging their liability to the bank by payment? Construing the statement of the consideration stated in the bill of sale by the surrounding facts requisite to support it, I can come to no other conclusion than that it is not truly set out, and that this is one of the cases the mischief of which it was the object of the statute to prevent. On both grounds, therefore, on which the trustee has moved to set this bill aside, I hold that he must succeed, and the costs of the application must follow the decision. Trevor Davies, Sherborne, for the trustee. B. Fossett Lock, barrister, for the grantees.

OBITUARY.

THE RIGHT HON. JOHN PARKER.

The Right Hon. John Parker, barrister, died, at his residence in Onslow-square, on the 5th inst., in his eightysecond year. The deceased was the son of the late Mr. Hugh Parker, of Tickhill, Yorkshire, and was born in 1799. He was educated at Repton School and at Brasenose College, Oxford, where he took the usual degrees. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in 1824, and he was for several years a member of the Northern Circuit. He was elected M.P. for the borough of Sheffield in the Liberal interest in 1832, and he held the seat till the general election of 1852, when he was an unsuccessful candidate. He was a lord of the Treasury from 1836 till 1841, and he was secretary to the Admiralty for a few months during the latter year. He was financial secretary to the Treasury from 1846 till 1849, when he again became secretary to the Admiralty, and he held the latter office till the fall of

Lord John Russell's Ministry in 1852. After his defeat at Sheffield, Mr. Parker retired from political life, but he was sworn a member of the Privy Council in 1853. He was a magistrate for the East Riding of Yorkshire, and he was married in 1836 to the daughter of Mr. George Vernon, of Clontarf Castle, Dublin.

MR. JOHN HILL BURTON, LL.D.

Mr. John Hill Burton, advocate, LL.D., died at his residence at Edinburgh on the 10th ult. The deceased was the son of an officer in the 94tb Regiment, and was born at Aberdeen in 1809. He was educated at Marischal College, Aberdeen, and he was admitted a member of the Faculty of Advocates in Scotland in 1831. He was the author of a "Manual of the Law of Scotland," which has always occupied a high position as a text-book. In 1854 he was appointed secretary to the Scottish Board of Prisons, and he was subsequently a Commissioner of Prisons, but he devoted most of his leisure time to literature. His best-known books were his "History of Scotland,' ,""Reign of Queen Anne," and "Life of David Hume," and he also contributed many lighter articles to Blackwood and other publications. Mr. Burton had received the degree of LL.D. from the University of Aberdeen. He was also an honorary D.C.L. of Oxford, and in 1867 he was appointed by the late Lord Gordon to the office of Historiographer Royal of Scotland. He was much beloved by a large circle of friends.

LEGAL APPOINTMENTS.

Mr. JOSEPH WILLIAM CHITTY, Q.C, M.P., has been appointed a Judge of the Chancery Division. Mr. Justice Chitty is the second son of the late Mr. Thomas Chitty, special pleader, and was born in 1828. He was educated at Eton and at Balliol College, Oxford, where he graduated first class in classics in 1851. He obtained the Vinerian Law Scholarship in 1852, and he was subsequently elected a fellow of Exeter College. He was stroke of the winning Oxford boat in the University race of 1852. He was called to the bar at Lincoln's-inn in Easter Term, 1856, and became a Queen's Counsel in 1874, and he has been for several years a leader in the Rolls Court. Mr. Justice Chitty is a bencher of Lincoln's-inn, and he was for several years major in the Inns of Court Volunteers. He was elected M.P. for the city of Oxford, in the Liberal interest, at the general election of 1880. He is married to a daughter of the late Lord Chief Baron, Sir Frrderick Pollock.

Mr. JAMES REDFord Bulwer, Q. C., who has been elected M.P. for Cambridgeshire in the Conservative interest, on the resignation of Mr. Benjamin Bridges Hunter Rodwell, Q.C., is the eldest son of the Rev. James Bulwer, rector of Hunworth, Norfolk. He was born in 1820, and he was educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, where he took the usual degrees. He was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Hilary Term, 1847, and he became a Queen's Counsel in 1864. He was for several years leader of the Norfolk Circuit, but since the last re-arrangement of the assizes he has practised on the South-Eastern Cirenit. Bulwer was recorder of Ipswich from 1861 till 1866, when he was appointed recorder of Cambridge. He was M.P. for Ipswich from 1874 till 1880. He is lieut.-colonel of the Inns of Court Volunteers, and a bencher of the Inner Temple, having served the office of treasurer of that society last year, and he is common law editor of the Law Reports.

Mr.

Mr. WILLIAM JOHN BRUTY, solicitor, of 6, Tokenhonse yard, and of Chelmsford and Waltham Abbey, has been ap pointed Clerk to the Stipendiary Magistrate at West Ham. Mr. Bruty is registrar of the Waltham Abbey County Court. He was admitted a solicitor in 1862, and he is in partner ship with Mr. William Ward Duffield.

Mr. JOHN GIVAN, solicitor, M.P., who has been appointed an Assistant Commissioner under the Irish Land Act, is the son of Mr. Johu Givan, and was born in 1847. He was admitted a solicitor at Dublin in 1870, and he was elected M. P. for the county of Monaghan, in the Liberal interest, at the general election of 1880.

Mr. DENIS GODLEY, secretary to the Inland Navigation

has been

Commission and Irish Church Commission, appointed Secretary to the Irish Land Commission, in place of Mr. Morrogh O'Brien, who, at his own request, has been placed at the head of the department which will be more immediately connected with the purchasing of land by tenants. Mr. Godley was private secretary to Lord Monck when Governor-General of Canada.

Mr. FREDERICR GEORGE HINDLE, solicitor, of Darwen, has been appointed Clerk to the new Borough Bench, at a salary of £350 per annum, with liberty of private practice. Mr. Hindle was admitted a solicitor in 1870.

Mr. LEONARD JEFFERY, solicitor, of Eastbourne, has been appointed Clerk to the Eastbourne Board of Guardians, Assessment Committee, and Rural Sanitary Authority. Mr. Jeffery was admitted a solicitor in 1879.

Messrs. LANGHAM & SON, solicitors, of Uckfield and Eastbourne, have been appointed Joint Clerks to the Uckfield Local Board, and the Uckfield Burial Board. Mr. James George Langham was admitted a solicitor in 1845, and is clerk to the county magistrates at Uckfield and Hailsham. Mr. Edward Owen Langham was admitted a solicitor in 1879.

Mr. EDWARD FALCONER LITTON, Q.C., M.P., who has been appointed a Commissioner under the Irish Land Act, is the son of Mr. Daniel Litton, and was born in 1827. He was educated at Trinity College, Dublin. He was called to the Irish bar in 1849, and became a Queen's Counsel in 1874. He is a member of the Munster Circuit, and he was elected M.P. for the county of Tyrone, in the Liberal interest, at the general election of 1880.

The Right Hon. JAMES LOWTHER, barrister, who has been elected M.P. for the Northern Division of Lincolnshire, in the Conservative interest, is the second son of Sir Charles Hugh Lowther, baronet, and was born in 1810. He was educated at Westminster and at Trinity College, Cambridge, and he was called to the bar at the Inner Temple in Michaelmas Term, 1864. He was M.P. for the city of York from 1865 till the general election of 1880, and he is a magistrate and deputy-lieutenant for the North Riding of Yorkshire. Mr. Lowther was secretary to the Poor Law Board, from August till December, 1868, Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies from 1874 till 1878, and Chief Secretary for Ireland from 1878 till 1880. He was created a Privy Councillor in 1878.

Mr. HAROLD STANLEY MAPLES, solicitor, of Spalding, has been appointed Clerk to the County Magistrates at that place, on the resignation of his father, Mr. Ashley Maples. Mr. H. S. Maples is also clerk to the Spalding Board of Guardians. He was admitted a solicitor in 1873, and he is in partnership with his father.

COMPANIES.

WINDING-UP NOTICES. JOINT STOCK COMPANIES.

LIMITED IN CHANCERY.

ARTS PROMOTION SOCIETY, LIMITED.- Petition for winding up, presented Aug 30, directed to be heard before the Vacation Judge at Rolls yd, Chancery lane, on Sept 14. Tibbitts and Son, Field ct Gray's inn, solicitors for the petitioner

IMPERIAL UNION ASSURANCE COMPANY, LIMITED.-Cave, J., has fixed Sept 13 at 11.30, at 10 Chancery lane, for the appointment of an official liquidator

LIBERIA COFFEE COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order made by Cave, J., dated Aug 24, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Holland, St Swithin's lane, King William st, solicitor for the petitioner LOMBARD LOAN AND INVESTMENT COMPANY, LIMITED.-Cave, J., has by an order, dated Aug 2, appointed Mr. William Robertson, 40 Finsbury circus, to be official liquidator NORTH-WESTERN RAILWAY OF MONTE VIDEO COMPANY, LIMITED.Creditors are required, on or before Oct 10, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or claims, to Edward John Davis and Fritz Berdhard Behr, 113 Cannon st. Nov 2 at 11.30 is appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims WEARMOUTH CROWN GLASS COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order made by Cave, J., dated Aug 24, it was ordered that the voluntary winding up of the company be continued. Hickin, Serjeants' inn, Fleet st, agent for Moore and Co, Sunderland, solicitors for the petitioner

[Gazette, Sept 2.1

H. J. IVORY AND COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented Sept 3, directed to be heard before the Vacation Judge at Roll's yard, on Sept 14. Beyfus and Beyfus, Lincoln's inn fields, solicitors for the petitioner

MILFORD DOCKS COMPANY.-Petition for winding up, presented Sept 2, directed to be heard before the Vacation Judge on Sept 11. Chapman, London wall, solicitor for the petitioner PROVINCE OF BRESCIA STEAM TRAMWAY COMPANY, LIMITED.--By an order made by Cave, J., dated Aug 17, it was ordered that the voluntary winding up of the company be continued. Bellamy and Co, Bishopsgate st Within, solicitors for the petitioners PROVINCIAL MONETARY COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented Sept 6, directed to be heard before Kay, J., on Sep 14. Kingsford and Co, Essex st, Strand, agents for Titley, Bath, solicitor for the petitioners

RICHARD ROSSER, SON, AND COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for wind ing up, presented Sept 5, directed to be heard before Cave, J. on Sept 14. Peacopp, South sq, Gray's inn, agent for Thomas Neath, solicitor for the petitioner

[Gazette, Sept. 6.]

UNLIMITED IN CHANCERY. MIDDLESBOROUGH, REDCAR, SALTBURN-BY-THE-SEA, AND CLEVELAND DISTRICT PERMANENT BENEFIT BUILDING SOCIETY.-By an order made by Cave, J., dated Aug 24, it was ordered that the seciety be wound up. Paterson and Co, solicitors for the petitioners [Gazette, Sept. 2.]

CREDITORS' CLAIMS.

Mr. WILLIAM MICKS has been appointed Assistant CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. Secretary to the Irish Land Commission.

DISSOLUTIONS OF PARTNERSHIPS. HARRY HANSEN BARROWS and ARTHUR BARROW ALLEN (Allen & Barrows), solicitors, Ellesmere, Salop. August 8. In future the business will be carried on by the said Arthur Barrow Allen on his separate account.

[Gazette, September 2, 1881.]

LAST DAY OF PROOF.

ALTON, JOHN, Marlpool, Derby, Cordwainer. Oct 1. Woodhouse v Alton, M.R. Heath, Derby

BRIER, JOHN, Booth Town, Halifax, Coal Merchant. Sept 5. Brier v Evison, District Registrar, Halifax. Rhodes, Halifax [Gazette, Aug 26.] HELLEWELL, FREDERICK, Park village East, Regent's pk, India Rubber Manufacturer. Sept 29. Mills v Mills, Registrar, Liverpool WITHERDEN, ELIZABETH, The Paragon, Hackney. Oct 10, Brandon v Witherden, V.C. Hall. Voss, Vestry Hall, Bethnal Green [Gazette, Aug. 30.]

JOSEPH JOHN MORGAN, ROBERT CHARLES PONSONBY, and CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. CAP. 25.

THOMAS GEMMELL (Park Nelson, Morgan, Ponsonby, & Gemmell), solicitors, 11, Essex-street, Strand. August 31. Joseph John Morgan and Thomas Gemmell will continue to carry on business under the partnership style of Park Nelson, Morgan, & Gemmell, and Robert Charles Ponsonby will carry on business on his own account at 105, St. George's-road.

THOMAS EDWARD TWISDEN and CHARLES LEWEs Parker, solicitors, 60, Russell-square. September 1.

[Gazette, September 6, 1881.]

LAST DAY OF CLAIM.

[blocks in formation]

HOWARD, GRACE, Leeds. Oct 1. Dunning and Co, Leeds
HUGHES, WILLIAM, Drury lane, Ironmonger. Sept 20. Lovett and
Co, King William st

JACKSON, JOSEPH, sen., Nether Knutsford, Chester, Draper. Sept 30. Sedgley and Co, Knutsford

LETHBRIDGE, CONSTANTINE VAWDEN, Whitchurch, Devon, Gent. Sept 19. Church and Co, Bedford row

LETHBRIDGE, MARY JANE, Whitchurch, Devon. Sept 19. Church and Co, Bedford row

MARSHALL, MARIA LETITIA, Queen sq, Bath. Sept 17. Robertson and Maule, Bath

MERSON, DAVID, Throgmorton st, Stockbroker. Sept 19. Gibb, Fenchurch avenue

MILLS, JOSEPH, East India rd, Poplar, Cooper. Oct 1. Lovell and Co, Gray's inn sq

PAGE, THOMAS, Upper Winchendon, Buckingham, Wheelwright.
Sept 29. Fell, Aylesbury,

PICKERING, CHARLES WILLIAM HARRISON, New Brighton, Chester,
Merchant. Sept 30. Simpson and North, Liverpool
POPHAM, FRANCES MARY, Chailey, Sussex. Sept 30. Ingram and
Co, Lincoln's inn fields

RIDEHALGH, JAMES, Liscard, Chester, Contractor. Oct 1. Gardner and Smith, Liverpool

SANDERS, SAMUEL, Bletchingley, Surrey, Gent. Sept 23. Head and Sons, East Grinstead

SCOTT, HENRY LEMAN, New Park terrace, Brixton hill, Draper. Oct 1. Amoore, Sloane st

TAYLOR, ELIZABETH, Kendal, Westmoreland.

and Wilson, Kendal

Oct 8. Thomson

[blocks in formation]

GUNNINGHAM, RICHARD, Swansea, Commercial Traveller. Sept 24. Brittans and Co, Bristol

HARRISON, JOHN, Royal Hospital, Chelsea. Oct 1. Ullithorne and Co, Field ct, Gray's inn

HARVEY, JOHN, South Benfleet, Essex, Farmer. Sept 29. Gregson,
Rochford

HORWOOD, ALFRED JOHN, Hanover st, Peckham, Barrister-at-Law.
Sept 29. Hewlett, Raymond bldgs, Gray's inn
HUNT, CHARLES, Odcombe, Somerset. Oct 1.
Clement's inn

KINDER, JOHN, Great Budworth, Chester, Gent.
Co, Warrington

MACLEOD, Dame HENRIETTA, Norfolk crescent,
Rhodes and Son, Chancery lane
MCINTOSH, DAVID, Romford, Essex, Esq. Oct 31.
Gresham house

Newman and Co,

Oct 15. Jeans and Hyde pk. Oct 24.

Paines and Co,

PAGET, WILLIAM, Blomfield st, Paddington, Esq. Sept 30. Jackson and Wright, Lincoln's inn fields

PULLER, EMILY GILES, Harley st. Sept 30. Clabon, Great George st, Westminster

QUICK, JAMES BRANNAN, Bridge rd, Haverstock Hill, Esq. Nov 1.
Clarke and Calkin, Raymond buildings, Gray's inn
ROBERTS, MARY, Bath. Oct 29. Stone and Co, Bath
STALLARD, JOHN, East Harptree, Somerset, Yeoman.
Rees-Mogg and Davy, Temple Cloud, nr Bristol

Sept 20.

TENNANT, JAMES, Carlton, Coverham, York, Gent. Sept 30. Topham and Burrill, Middleham

TROUGHTON, Rev THOMAS, Ashton upon Ribble, Lancaster, Clerk in Holy Orders. Oct 20

Winder, Preston

WHITMARSH, WILLIAM BURT, Chippenham, Wilts, Coroner. Sept 20. Collins and Son, Bath

WILLINGTON, FRANCIS, Tamworth, Warwick, Esq. Nov 1. Argyle and Sons, Tamworth

WINTER, ANTHONY, Tuxford, Nottingham, Farmer.

Marshall, East Retford

Νον 1.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

MOIR, JOHN MACRAE, King Henry's rd, South Hampstead, Barrister at Law. Sept 30. Churchill, Clement's inn, Strand MORRISON, JOHN, Tynemouth, Northumberland, Ship Owner. Nov 30. Ingledew and Daggett, Newcastle upon Tyne PETRIE, MARGARET, Gloucester terrace, Kensington. Oct 1. CollyerBristow and Co, Bedford row

RUDGE, WILLIAM NEWLAND, South Audley st, Grosvenor sq, Stock and Share Dealer. Oct 1. Morley and Shirreff, Palmerston bldgs, Old Broad st

TAYLOR, JOSEPH WILLIAM, Boston villas, Richmond, Wine Merchant. Oct 1. Child, Paul's Bakehouse ct, Doctors' Commons TOWNEND, JAMES HAMILTON, Lime st, Esq. Oct 17. Sawbridge, Milk st, Cheapside

WAGNER, LUDWIG THEODORE, Lower Seymour st, Merchant. Oct 15. Hartmann, Queen's rd, Finsbury pk

WHITFIELD, ANN, Gower st, Bedford sq. Oct 1. Sismey, Serjeant's inn, Fleet st

WYATT, MARY ANNE, Addison rd, Kensington. Nov 1. Marston and Sons, Ludlow

WYLD, MARY SARAH, Studley rd, Stockwell. Oct 15. Withall and Co, Great George st, Westminster [Gazette, Aug 30.]

SOLICITORS' REMUNERATION

ACT, 1881. CHAPTER 44.

AN Act for making better provision respecting the Remuneration of Solicitors in Conveyancing and other non-contentious Business. [22nd August, 1881.]

Be it enacted, &c. :

Preliminary.

1. Short title; extent; interpretation-29 & 30 Vict. c. 84.] (1.) This Act may be cited as the Solicitors Remuneration Act, 1881.

(2.) This Act does not extend to Scotland. (3). In this Act

"Solicitor" means a solicitor or proctor qualified according the statutes in that behalf:

"Client" includes any person who, as a principal, or on behalf of another, or as trustee or executor, or in any other capacity, has power, express or implied, to retain or employ, and retains or employs, or is about to retain or employ, a solicitor, and any person for the time being liable to pay to a solicitor, for his services, any costs, remuneration, charges, expenses, or disbursements:

"Person" includes a body of persons corporate or unin corporate:

"Incorporated Law Society" means, in England, the

society referred to under that title in the Act passed in the session of the twenty-third and twenty-fourth years of Her Majesty's reign, intituled "An Act to amend the Laws relating to Attorneys, Solicitors, Proctors, and Certificated Conveyancers"; and, in Ireland, the society referred to under that title in the Attorneys and Solicitors Act, Ireland, 1866: "Provincial law societies or associations" means all bodies of solicitors in England incorporated by Royal Charter, or under the Joint Stock Companies Act, other than the Incorporated Law Society above mentioned.

General Orders.

2. Power to make General Orders for remuneration in conveyancing, &c.] In England the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Justice of England, the Master of the Rolls, and the president for the time being of the Incorporated Law Society, and the president of one of the provincial law societies or associations, to be selected and nominated from time to time by the Lord Chancellor to serve during the tenure of office of such president, or any three of them, the Lord Chancellor being one, and, in Ireland the Lord Chancellor, the

« PreviousContinue »