« PreviousContinue »
THE BRIGHTON MEETING.
-oke Who Was Present" sends us the following observations on the recent meeting of the Incorporated Law Society :—
Some doubt was expressed after the meeting last year at Sheffield whether the Sussex Law Sooiety had not undertaken too great a task in the invitation which they gave to the Incorporated Law Society to hold their eighth annual provincial meeting this yenr at Brighton. I believe some communication was made to the Sussex Law Society with a view to assist them in the task which they bad undertaken, but after mature consideration they resolved to adhere to their original determination. They are certainly to be most heartily congratulated upon the great success which has attended their efforts; and the brilliant reoeption given by them to the Incorporated Law Society will live long in the memories of those who were so wiss as to accept the invitation. Whether regard be had to the convenience and adaptability of the rooms in'which the meetings were held, or to the excellence of the very recherche lunch which was so liberally provided each day, or to the grand banquet which was so successfully arranged in the Dome, or whether attention be exclusively confined to the conversazione and ball held in that magnificent suite of rooms at the Pavilion, which are unexcelled in any other part of the county, or to the dinners at which the various solicitors of the town entertained small parties on Wednesday, or to the excursions so wisely arranged and so ably carried out on Thursday, it cannot be doubted that neither time nor expense had been spared to prepare for the entertainment in the fullest and most acceptable manner of the large number of guests who attended the meeting. Sometimes where so much has to be done in comparatively so abort a space of lime, those who may not have participated in the requisite preliminary labour are rather apt to overlook the hard work which has to be done in order to bring to a successful issue so many different arrangements.
The courteous and able president, Mr. Howlett, is entitled to the warmest thanks of all, as well as the vice-president, Mr. Williams, who did all in his power most efficiently to aid Mr. Howlett. It is not too much to say that Mr. C. 0. Druce more than justified the expectations which had been Iformed of the way in which he would discharge the responsible duties of his position. His address was plain and practical, and, if not so expan. sive as some of those of his predecessors, this was no drawback and had the advantage of securing more time for the reading and discussion of the papers which followed. It ■was ■wisely arranged that, concurrently with the reading of the address, prints of it should be circulated in the room. Each year, by the way, the preparation of the annual address becomes more difficult, since it is not always easy to find new topics for consideration, and to adorn an address, except at the risk of repeating observations previously made, ^vith those remarks which ore so essential to the completeness of its composition. Mr. Druce successfully steered the meeting over a few difficulties, and exercised in a quiet, unobtrusive way a degree of firmness and courtesy which he ■will no doubt find to be of value when the council summon the proposed meeting to consider the report of the Legal Procedure Committee, which is sure to provoke a large amount of interesting and warm discussion.
There were not a few plausible observations in the paper on Bankruptcy read by Mr. Bernard Wake. Some of the trenchant principles which he enunciated were not without tbeir effect, and his paper was valuable as promoting a lively and interesting discussion, which will not be without adTantage in determining the legislation which must so soon take place in reference to this matter. Prominenco was necessarily given by the president in his address to the admitted need for the appointment of a chief judge of equal rank with the judges of the Supreme Court arid devoting his whole time to the duties of his office, as a fundamental part -of any amendment in the bankruptcy laws. This is a point upon which the profession has more than once expressed a very decided opinion, and it is somewhat gratifying to know that it will he conceded in its integrity in the Bill which it is intended to introduce into Parliament next session.
The paper of Mr. A. Bell was aimed at misconceptions at the present time existing with regard ts the effect and operation of settlements. The paper was a most able one, and is calculated to remove a great many of the misappre
hensions entertained by those who have not closely studied the subject, or are unfamiliar with the origin and the nature of the law relating to the possession of, and power to deal with, landed estates. Mr. Bell is now in his eightieth year, and it is noteworthy to find that so experienced and eminent a member of the profession is gltd to give to his brother professionals the result of his years of experience, and to incur the trouble—f ir it was no little trouble—of preparing the paper to which so many had the pleasure of listening. It was not, however, to be expected that it would pass without provoking hostility in some quarters. A suggestion was made that a copy of Mr. Bell's paper should be sent to each member of the Houses of Parliament. There is no reason why this should not still be done, and perhaps it is a pity that the proposer of this suggestion did not press it to a vote, as from what was afterwards expressed it is probable the proposal would have been adopted.
Some difference of opinion was at first manifested as to the advantage of the paper read by Mr. Sawyer ou L»nd Tenure and Division in Brighton and the neighbourhood, but as the information whiob the paper contained became known it was generally felt that it conveyed to many present knowledge which they would not otherwise have acquired, and which was not without use as indicating the variety of forms in which land tenure and division exist throughont the country.
One was glad to see so young a member of the profession as Mr. J. S. Kubenstein reading a paper on Lord Cairns' Act. It was listened to with marked attention, and from some expressions which fell from different members, it is quits evident that the paper imparted to them knowledge which they had not yet obtained from the Act. It produced an interesting discussion with regard to the future remuneration of solicitors, which will, of course, have to ba materially altered when the Act in question comes into operation. A very earnest desire was expressed in different quarters that the council should speedily direct their attention to the Solicitors' Remuneration Act, and without loss of time consult together as to the form in which it would be best to give effect to the Act and to prescribe those rules by which solicitors should be guided in the adoption of its provisions. There were many present from oitlying districts, who, in matters of this kind, have for the most part no other guide to follow than the directions of the council, who cannot give too close or too speedy a consideration to this really important matter. A fear was expressed lest the members of the council, many of whom have had experience chiefly in the management of large matters, should be inclined to bestow too little attention in considering how provision should be made for the remuneration of those solicitors who have to deal with comparatively Bmall purchases, mortgages, and sales, and whose interest in this respect has not hitherto been too much heeded by the counoil. It is those transactions, say from £300 up to £1,500 or £2,000, which form the great majority of the matters with whioh solicitors are constantly called upon to deal, and which very often give as much, if not more trouble, in consequence of the variety of dealings with them, than property of larger value.
The meeting was indebted to Mr. Saunders for his excellent paper on Bills of Sile. At first there was a disposition to let Mr. Saunders have everything his own way. As was remarked by Mr. Bramley, of Sheffield, there is sometimes a disposition at these provincial meetings to grasp only one idea, and because au important matter is ably dealt with from one point of view, to ignore what could probably be said on the other side, and hence resolutions are sometime < passed with insufficient consideration. This is because the reader of the paper has been able to get up his subject from his point of view, while those who may be deposed to take a contrary view, being ignorant of the line which the reader proposes to take, have consequently not had the opportunity of lookiug into the subject and formulating their ideas in such a manner as to be able to give satisfactory expression to what they would desire to say. The president wisely called for some resolution on the matter, at the same time pointing out the difficulties which the council had experienced iu dealing with it owing to ihe differences of opinion prevailing, not only between town and country members, but also between town members themselves and between provincial members. Themeeting was at this time largely attended, and those of the resolutions which were carried may be taken aa representing the views of the profetiion generally. Mr. Saunders was, of course, cot satisfied with the result, and did not hail with very much satisfaction the practical but logical course which Mr. Wake proposed to take with a view to rendering bills of sale altogether void.
The position and prospects of the profession were ably dealt with by Mr. William Ford in his admirable paper. This gentleman was for many years a member of the council, and was president at the time when Mr. Clabon and others were so anxiouB, with a view, as it was thought, of effecting amalgamation, to introduce a sohool of law common to both branches of the profession. Mr. Ford naturally could not resist the temptation of referring to the objections whioh existed, and which still appear to exist, to that proposal, in favour of which very little can be said after tbe reasons so convincingly and powerfully urged by Mr. Ford. He gave his paper a practical turn, and concluded by a motion which in somewhat altered terms, wisely suggested by Mr. Walters, was ultimately adopted with perfeot unanimity. No doubt the council, whose attention to this point has never been relaxed, will take the earliest available opportunity of giving efTeot to the resolution placing in their hands a power, subject to appeal, to dispense with the preliminary examination, or rather, as was suggested by some, to dispense with oertain of tbe subjects now demanded. In dealing with this matter it should not be forgotten that one reason for introducing tbe dispensing power was to provide for tbe oases of those who had been many years in the profession, and who were natnrally looking forward to their articles without having to undergo the examination. Besides which the fact that the clerical and medical professions always insist upon an examination of this description is a powerful reason why this dispensing power should not in future be exercised, save under the most exceptional circumstance?. It was also felt that to insist npon the preliminary examination would give some protection against the temptation to which solicitors are liable to be exposed when asked to artiole clerks, not altogether qualified, but who otherwise threaten to leave, or who, iu consideration, consent to receive a Bmall salary or to serve a solioitor on satisfactory terms who has but recently commenced to practice. Case?, it was stated, might be mentioned in whioh solicitors, either comparatively young or not too successful in the profession, had generously, but nnwisely, yielded to the persuasion and pressure whioh had been employed.
Some disappointment was felt that Mr. Keen had not found time to prepare one of those short, tersely-expressed papers which have been expected almost as a matter of course. He took advantage, however, to get a resolution turned respecting tbe number of unqualified persons who still intrench upon the prerogatives of tbe solicitor at the expense of the public. In his hands tbe matter is sure to be tffectively and judiciously handled, and next year he will be able to state the result of the council's action with regard thereto. Some slight pressure it seems was put upon Mr. Manning to postpone the reading of his paper on Parliamentary Procedure, as being scarcely in harmony with the business which tbe meeting was assembled to transact. The subject, however, of Parliamentary Agents was a few years mice dealt with by Mr. Clabon, and from the expressions of approval with which certain observations made by Mr. Manning were received, it cannot be doubted that it was, after all, well arranged that his paper should be read. It was intended at its conclusion to interrogate Mr. Keen as to what had been the result of his endeavour to induce the council to take steps with a view to obtain from tbe profession a psrliamentary representative, bnt the time was short, and the president was right in suggesting that the reading of tbe papers should be proceeded with. Mr. Keen has not, I am tore), lost light of the suhjtct, and on the first fitting opportunity will, I hope, direct his attention thereto. It is, of course, a subject which will bear consideration, and can afford to wait. Probably Mr. Manning, in preparing bis paper, was influenced by a desire to further the movement.
The fusion of the superior and inferior emits is a subject which was fittingly noticed by Mr. F. K. Munton, and although thsrt was no time to discuss any of his various proposals, yet the day is probably not far distant when reform will take place in the direction indicated by bim. If there had been time, the series of recommendations with which he concluded might conveniently have been sub
mitted to the meeting, and the members' views taken thereon.
Mr. G. K. Dodd was both entertaining and instructive in hia essay on the "Rights and Claims of Married Women." The paper might, in some respects, have been advantageously abridged, and closer attention confined to the remarks contained in the latter part. A meeting is liable to become impatient if too much time is occupied in tracing the mere antiquated history of a subject at the sacrifice of insufficient attention being given to tbe more practical part of tbe paper. Mr. Dodd may on another occasion take up some of bis suggestions and argue them to a conclusion, and thus enable bis readers to see more clearly what are his conclusions and how far they are practicable.
It was hardly to be expected that the meeting; would bo allowed to pass without a contribution from Mr. Godfrey. Although he was some time in arriving at the subject which was announced as the title of his paper, yet the president correctly ruled that he was in order in the way in which his subject was dealt with. Mr. Godfrey would prefer that tha council should have waited until they could secure the inmediate transfer of tbe solicitor from one branch of the profession to the other, but, as was explained on tbe part of tha council, it was thought that they had not only acted wisely but well in tbe instalment of justice which they had accepted, and that reasons migbt be found to satisfy those who thoughi differently that the period of one year was from many points of view a wise arrangement. The feeling, however, of tha meeting was to leave the matter in the hands of the council to do the best they could without bringing about that amalgamation of the two branches of the profession which it seems to be tbe chief object of Mr. Godfrey to secure.
An expression of regret was in some quarter felt that tbe meeting did not have the opportunity of hearing Mr. Kimber'i paper on the " Abolition of Taxation npon Justice." However instructive the paper might have been, it woald certainly at least have been amusing, and at meetings of thiav kind a little judicious hilarity frequently creates a pleaaiiur, diversion. True, all the papers which are not read will be printed by tbe society and circulated in tbe usual way, but of course the papers do lose some of their value wbiu not read.
It was somewhat unfortunate that Mr. Mackrell's paper on " Law Writers and Night Work" was not reached. It deals with an interesting subject, which a man of Mr. Mackrell's experience and judgment would not be willing Xo take in hand, except be was sure of tbe ueed of calling; attention to it. It would appear that there an a large number of evils operating in a variety of ways in cooaequencs of the lateness of (he hour at which solicitors give out copying and engrossing work, and the unnecessarily early hour at which such work is required to be done. It is easy to perceive that this leads to results which are unsatisfactory to all parties—unsatisfactory to the men who have to do the work, and by uo mean* satisfactory to tbe stationer or the solicitor for whom the worst htm to be done. There are, of course, times when, during tha pending of a great trial, copies must be made as expeditiously as possible. It cannot be doubted that there is a great want of consideration on the part of solicitors and their clerks ia giving out work too late in the day, and by repairing it to be done earlier in the morning than is really needed. I cannot doubt that if this paper bad been read, some resoluticn would have been passed recommending the council to consider the matter, and to communicate with the profaaaioa thereon in such form as might be thought most suitable. The matter, however, will not be allowed to drop. Mr. Mackrcll ia by no means a man who, having put his hand to tbe plough, will be disposed to look back. He will, sat doubt, communicate with tbe council, and furnish them with suggestions as to the way in which he considers tboy cam effectively deal with tbe matter. Indeed, I have juat learned that if the opportunity had offered, Mr. Mackrell woald have moved the following resolution :—
"That this meeting, baving been made acquainted with the evils which result to law writers and their families frsn. a very large proportion of law stationers' work having tt> be done at night and on Sundays, and having bees informed that these evils could, to a great extent, be remedied by work being given out by solicitors early in the day, or by iu not being required to be sent borne until tbe middle of the aext day, earnestly hopo that the members of tbe society will establish this as a regulation of their offices to tar aa tha exigencies of business will allow."
It is much to be desired that the papers by Mr. Hanbart and Mr. William Ford should be speedily circulated, as they will, no doubt, convey come useful information and suggestions which may properly form the subject of consideration prior to the meeting which the council proposes to call on the subject of Legal Procedure.
The extent to which I have ventured to trespass upon your space must be the excuse for breaking off so abruptly, and with jour permission I will take an early opportunity of troubling you with some further remarks founded upon a close observation of what took place at BrigbtOD, just remarking, in conclusion, that I am sure those who were present will always cberish a most pleasing, agreeable, and instructive recollection of the society's eighth provincial
CASES OF THE WEEK.
Practice—Injunction—Ex Parts Motion Bt DefendAnt^—Rules Of Coubt, 1876, Obd. 52, R, 4.—A point of practice of some importance came before Cave, J., Bitting in the Rolls Court as Vacation Judge, on the 19th inst., in a case of Ini v. Kayler, as to the right of a defendant to apply ex parte for an injunction against a plaintiff. The question arose upon a motion on behalf of the plaintiff in an action in the Chancery Division, a young officer in the army, for an injunction to restrain the defendant in the notion, who was a money lender, from negotiating or otherwise dealing with certain bills given by the plaintiff to the defendant for money lent. The plaintiff having made default in meeting the bills, which had been renewed from time to time by the defendant on exorbitant term?, the defendant brought an action in the Queen's Bench Division to recover upon them, the writ being specially indorsed under Rules of Court, 1875, ord. 3, r. 6. The defendant also took out an ordinary debtor's summons in the Court of Bankruptcy against the plaintiff. The plaintiff, Ind, thereupon instituted an action in the Chancery Division against the defendant, Eayler, claiming a declaration that the bills should stand only for the money aotually advanced, with interest at the rate of five per cent, per annum, deducting the sums paid for renewal, in accordance with the decision in NtviU v. Snelling (L. R. 15 Cb. D. 679), and then moved in that action for an injunction as above mentioned. Cave, J., at first thought it was nnnecessary to have brought a separate action for the purpose in the Chancery Division, and that the plaintiff, aa defendant in the Queen's Bench action, might obtain the injunction in that aotion, and suggested that an application should be made for that purpose. Upon the application then being made in that aotion, his lordship granted the injunction till further order. Subsequently, however, his attention having been called to the Rules of Court, 1875, ord. 62, r. 4, which provides that a plaintiff may move for an injunction either ex parte or on notice, but that a defendant moy move on notice only, his lordship held that he oould not make the order ex parte in the Queen's Benoh action, and therefore made it in the chancery aotion.—Solicitous, Haynes <fc Clifton.
Company—Two Winding-up Petitions—Carriage Of Order.—In In re The Universities Co-operative Association [Zimited), also before Cave, J., sitting as Vacation Judge, two petitions had been presented for the winding up of the company ; one by How den, a debenture holder and depositor, whose petition had been presented before, but served on the company after, that presented by the other petitioners, Spottiswoode & Co., the printers and creditors of the company. Both petitions had, however, been advertised in the London Gazette on the same day, Rowden's petition standing first, but the latter petition had not been advertised in a daily newspaper seven clear days before the hearing as required by the rules under the Companies Act, 1862. The eounsel for Spottiswoode's petition submitted that they were entitled to an order on their petition; or if an order were made on both petitions, that they should have the carriage of it, The counsel for Rowden's petition, on the other hand, contended that an order should be made on both petitions, and the carriage of it given to their client. Rowden's petition was supported by n large body of shareholders, debenture holders, and depositors. Cave., J., made the
usual compulsory order on both petitions, and gave the> carriage of it to Rowden.—Solicitors, Nash § Field; Slagden; S.B. Turner; F. W. Reynolds.
Trade-mark—Infringement—Injunction—Form Of Order.—In Caruncho v. Stephenson, also before Cave, J., sitting as Vacation Judge, on the 19th inst., the plaintiffs were manufacturers and importers of cigars known as "La Intimidad" cigars. The defendant having sold cigars of an inferior quality under the same name, an injunction wasgranted, on the motion of the plaintiffs, restraining "the defendant, his servants, workmen, agents, travellers, and representatives respectively, from selling, or causing or allowing to be sold, and from in any manner representing, or causing or procuring to be represented, any cigars manufactured, sold, or dealt in by the defendant as 'La Intimidad'' cigars, or as the cigars manufactured, imported, or sold by the plaintiffs, or either of them; and also from affixing, or procuring or causing or allowing to be fixed, to any boxes of cigars manufactured or bought, or procured, or sold, or attempted to be sold, by the defendant, or otherwise using or employing, or permitting to be sold or employed, any label?,, wrappers, brands, or marks used by the plaintiffs or either of them, or so contrived or prepared as to represent or lead to the belief that the cigars manufactured or sold by the defendant were the cigars manufactured or sold by the plaintiffs, or either of them, and from using the words ' La Intimidad' on any cigars, or boxes or wrappers containing; cigars, so as to induce the belief that such cigars are manufactured or imported by the plaintiffs or either of them, pending the trial of this action."—Solicitors, Zumletjr <J Lumley,
Lessor And Lessee—Forcible Entrt—Illegal PosSession—5 Rio. 2, c. 28.—In the case of Hodges v. Laingf before Cave, J., sitting in the Rolls Court as Vacation Judge,, on the 14th inst., the plaintiff moved for an injunction to restrain the defendant from pulling down premises in the> plaintiff's occupation. It appeared that the plaintiff had been tenant of premises in King William-street, under a lease granted by the Charing Cross Hospital, and which lease expired on the 29th September, last. The plaintiff had, after the expiration of the lease, continued in possession, and, alleging that the hospital was under an agreement with him to renew his lease, had commenced an action against the hospital with respeot to the agreement in question. The) defendant in the present action was a builder, who, acting nnder the instructions of a gentleman to whom the hospital had granted a lease of the premises in King William-street, had forcibly entered those premises, and, against the plaintiff's will, pulled down portions, and proceeded to make certaius alterations desired by the new lessee. Counsel on bebalf of the plaintiff contended that, he was entitled 10 an injunotion on the ground that, whether or not the possession, of the plaintiff was legal, yet the forcible entry of the defendant was illegal, and against the statute 5 Ric. 2, c. 28,. which requires entry not to be made with a strong hand, but legally. The decision of Fry, J., was cited in Beddall v. Maitland (L. R. 17 Ch. D. 174), and the very recent decision of the same learned judge in Edwiek v. Hawkes. Cave, J., said in deciding the question before him he did not on the one hand wish it to go forth that he was upholding a forcible entry, but he did not on the other hand wish it to bethought that he was deciding that the plaintiff was legally in possession. His lordship, nnder the circumstances, considered the proper course would be to make no order, but the defendant; must give an undertaking not to commit a forcible entry,— Solicitors, Rose Innet $ Son; Dubois Reid.
Injunction—Private CorrespondEncb— Libel.—In the> oase of Evans v. Digby, also before Cave, J., on the 11th inst., the plaintiff moved for an injunction to restrain the defendant from publishing letters written by the plaintiff to the defendant. It appeared that the defendant bad published a single letter written by the plaintiff to the. defendant. The letter thus published was handed to Cave, J., for perusal. Cave, J., after perusing the letter, said it was an atrocious libel and that the writer could not be granted tbe protection Bought for. His lordship was not prepared to recognize any property in such a document, and tbe motion must be dismissed with costs.. —Solicitors, Peacock $ Goddard; A. Jones.
LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL.
BIRMINGHAM LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.
The second meeting of the autumn session of this society was held in the Law Library, Bennett's-hill, Birmingham, on Tuesday, the 27th ult. The chair was taken by Edwin Parry, Esq., registrar of the Birmingham County Court. The minutes of the previous meeting having been read and confirmed, a debate took place on moot point No. 652: "A. dies leaving a legacy to B. of £2,000 charged on his (A.'s) real and personal property payable on the death of his widow C. The property, consisting of realty to the value of £1,000 and personalty to the value of £9,000, is not to be sold under the terms of A.'s will until C.'s death. B. dies before C, having bequeathed his legacy to a charity. Would the charity derive any benefit under B.'s will?' Mr. Barrows opened the discussion on the affirmative side, and was supported by Messrs. T. C. J. Brown, E. C. Rogers, and W. S. Rogers. Mr. Ludlow led on the negative side, and was supported by Messrs. Robinson, Whitehouse,and G. Hoggins. After the opening speakers on either side had raplied, the chairman summed up, and on the question being pnt to tbe meeting, it was decided in tbe negative by a majority of one. A vote of thanks to the chairman concluded the meeting.
The 693rd ordinary meeting of the Birmingham Law Students' Society was held In the Law Library, Bennett'shill, Birmingham, on Tuesday, the 11th inst., A. J. O'Connor, Esq., in the chair, There was a good attendance, twenty-nine members of the society being present. The moot point for discussion was as follows :—"A. is a passenger in a coach; the coach is run into and overturned by another vehicle, and A. sustains injury. Can A. recover damages for his Injury from the owners of the other vehicle, notwithstanding that there was contributory negligence on the part of the driver of the ooach in which A. was?" The speakers on the affirmative side were MesBrs. Smith, Lawden, Ryland, Stevens, Barrows, Restall, and Coohrane; and on the negative side Messrs. Corbett, G. Huggins, Coley, Clark, and E. C. Rogers. The discussion was sustained with spirit, and the opening apeakers on either side having replied, the chairman summed up and put the question to tbe meeting. The votes were equal, upon which the chairman gave his casting vote in favour of the negative. A vote of thanks to the chairman concluded the meeting.
Mr. Josbto Bradburt, solicitor, of Oldham, Saddleworth, and Ashton-under-Lyrie, has been appointed Clerk to the Saddleworlh BDard of Guardians, Assessment Committee, Rural Sanitary Authority, and Sohool Attendance Committee. Mr. Bradbury was admitted a solicitor in 1877.
Mr. Charles Makinson, solicitor (of the firm of Makinson & Fuller), of Manchester, has been elected an Alderman for the Borough of Salford. Mr. Makinson was admitted solicitor in 1857.
.Mr. J Iin- Harris Square, solicitor, of Kingsbridge, has been appointed Clerk to the Kingsbridge B]ard of Guardian1, Assessment Committee, and Rural Sanitary Aathority. Mr. Square is the son of Mr. John Henry Square, registrar of the KingsbriditeCcunty Court. He was admitted a solicitor in 1874, and is in partnership with his father.
Mr. RtcntRD Pender Tyacke, solicitor, of St. Ives and Hayle, has been elected Town Clerk of the Borough of St. Ives, io succession to Mr. Thomas Brooking Williams, resigned. Mr. Tyacke was admitted a solicitor in 1873.
Mr. Porter Wilson, solicitor, of Louth and Alford, has been appointed Registrar of the Louth County Court (Circuit No. 17), in succession to Mr. Charles Michael AVaite, reaigned. Mr. Wilson was admitted a solicitor in 1804. He is in partnership with his father, Mr. James Wllian Wilson, who is clerk to the county magistrates at Louth.
Mr. Monieu F. Momm-Williams (of the firm of Bed
ford & Monier-Williams), has been appointed a Commissioner for Oaths io the High Court of Madras, and to take Acknowledgments of Married Women in respect of Property in Iudia. Mr. Monier-Williams is a son of Professor MonierWilliams, C.I.E., the Boden Professor of Sanscrit in the University of Oxford.
DISSOLUTION OF PARTNERSHIP. Thomas Etheridoe Harper, Ernest Broad, and Jobs Battcock, solicitors. 23, Rood-lane, London. So far as regards the said Ernest Broad. The will in future be carried on by the said Thon Harper and John Battoock, at the above address.
[Gazette, Oct. H, 1S8I.]
Alfbetox Aerated Water Comfaxy, Limited.—Kay, J, ham, by
an order dated Aug 23, appointed William Watson, ALfreton, to he official liquidator
Bobough Low Aid Drscouxr Comfaxt, Limited.—Petition far winding up, presented Oct 14, directed to be beard before Cave, J, on Oct 26. Pitman and Son, Queen Victoria at, agent* for Asamall, Hanley, Rolicitor for tho petitioners
Libbbia Coffee Compaxt, Limited.—Cave, J, ha*, by an order dated Aug 21, appointed William Lewis Clifton Browne, Queen at, to bo official liquidator
Northern Counties Bank, Limited.—By an order made by Care, J, dated Sept 28, it wa* ordered that tho voluntary winding up of the above back be continued. Nash and Field, Queen at, agents for Pybus, Newcastle-upon-T3*nc, solicitor for the petitioner
Southexd Marine Palace Company, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented Oct 5, directed to lie heard before Fry, J, on Nov 4. Hollingaworth and Co, East India avenue, solicitors tor the petitioners
St. John's-htreet (bradford) Theatbe And Concert Hau Company, Limited.—Kay, J, has, by an order dated Oct a, appointed William Martcllo Gray, Kirkgate, Bradford, to be official liquidator
Si. Vincent's Rocks Hotel Comfaxt, Limited.—Petition for winding up, presented Oct 10, directed lo bo heard before Fry, J, on Nov 4. Clarke and Co, Lincoln's inn fields, solicitors for the petitioner
[Gazette, Oct. 14.]
Grand Duchess Silvyr Le\d And Barytes Mintno Company, Limitbd.—Petition for winding np, presented July 29, directed to be heard before Hall, V C, on Nov 4. Jones and Co, Lincoln's inn Mollis, agents for Hughes and Sou, Aberystwith, sohcitors for
Sctton Pare Crystal Palace Company, Limited.—Kar. J. has, by an order dated Sept 27, appointed Edward Harold Carter,
Waterloo st, Birmingham, to bo official liquidator Wktley Bricx And Pottery Company, Limited.—Petition fx winding up, presented Oct 12, directed to lie heard before BAH, V C. on Nov 4. Kussol, Coleman at, solicitor for the petitioner!
[Gazette, Oct. la.)
Feiewdly Societies Dissolved.
Iron Dressers' United Sice And Burial Society, Star Hotel,
Gt Ancoates Rt, Manchester. Oct 11 Union Liberal Society, Providence Schoolroom, Brierneld,
Burnley, Lancaster. Oct 10 Wootton Britons' Friendly Socrirr, RcdJLion Inn, Woottoc,
Northampton. Oct 12
[.Gazette, Oct. 14.]
Old Meadows Colliery Accidbnt And Burial Society, Back
Inn, Bacup. Oct 13
Brougham rd, Southaea, Hants. Oct IS
L GaxetU, Oct 14.]
SUSPEXDBD FOE TlIREZ MoXTXS FROM OCT. 11.
Court Paradise Regained, 17fi, A.O.F. Society, Odd Fellows"
Hall, Upper Green, Koighley, York
Gomer Lodge Of Teue IvoarrBs Feiendlt Society,
Beaufort Ironworks, Llangattnek, Brecknock Pbixcb Of Walbs BKxarn Society, Red Lion Inn, A be ra ran,
Talirmx-ab.jolo Lodgb Of True Ivorites Fribxdly Socittt, Swan Inn, Beaufort Ironworks, Llangattock, Brecknock
[U*z*tr, Oct. la]
CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. CAP. 25.
LAST DAY OF CLAIM. Aldebsox, "Wiixsoir, Aston, York, Rector of Aston. Dec 25.
Alderson and Co, Eckington Bixdley, Theofhxlus, St Peter's rd, Croydon. Oct 20. Rowland,
Bboadwood, Thoicis, Cornwall gdns, South Kensington, Esq.
Nov 10. Johnsons and Co, Austin Friars Davisox, Johx, Liverpool, Licensed Victualler. Not 7. Bremner
and Co, Liverpool Edwards, Lewis, Bedlinog, Gelligaer, Glamorgan, Gent. Nov 15.
James and Co, Merthyr Tydfil Foster, Rev Joseph, Groatham, Southampton, Clerk. Nov 19.
Young and Co, St Mildred's ct Poultry Gabicett, Gbosoe, Elterwoter, Westmoreland, Farmer. Oct 28.
Gatey, Ambleside <3lyx, Douglas Robert, St James' sq, Esq. Nov 11. Bowlings and
Co, Essex st, Strand Howard, Jakes, Tonge, Lancaster, Architect. Oct 31. Clark, Old
Lawrevce, Jonir, Bentley, Arksey, York, Miller. Dec 1. Parkin
and Co, Doncaster Mills, Walter Georob, Bridgwater sq, House Agent. Nov 2.
Prideaux and Sons, Goldsmiths' hall, Foster lane Moore, Edward, Trent Vale, Stoke upon Trent, Gent. Oct 31.
Challinor, Han ley Oliver, John1, Lofthouso in Cleveland, York, Carrier. Oct 21.
Jackson and Jackson, Middlesborough Pacl, Waltkr .inn v, Buckfostleigh, Devon, Esq. Nov 15. Avory,
Sessions House, OKI Bailey Pippet, David, Souih Shields, Durham, Seaman. Dec 1. Thomson,
Smith, Frederick Edgar, Great Ryburgh, Norfolk, Miller. Dec 1.
Carthew and Girling, East Dereham Smith, Johk, Littleport, Cambridge, Builder. Nov 14. Archer and
Solomox, .inns, Southport, Lancaster, Esq. Nov 1. Mather, Liverpool
Speitcer, Awhte, Bnnbury, Chester. Oct 19. Cawley, Tarporloy Sutcliffe, John, Anthony terrace, Acton, Plumber. Nov 12.
Brown, Lincoln's inn fields Tii- • M v . Morgan, Gelligaer, Glamorgan, Farmer. Nov 15. James
and Co, Merthyr Tydfil Walker, Margaret, Liverpool, Pickle Manufacturer, Oct 17.
Mason and Gricrson, Liverpol Waltox, Samuel, Macclesfield, Chester, Gent. Oct 29. Mair and
Wn Alley, Frederick Williak Charles Buxtow, Queen's gato
terrace, South Kensington, Esq. Nov 10. Ingram and Co,
Lincoln's inn fields "wheeler, William, Strctham, Cambridge, Butcher. Nov 11.
Archer and Son, Ely "whittle, Solomon, Frampton on Severn, Gloucester, Gent. Oct
21. Aiisell, Birmingham Wuight, Rev Harry, Ilfracombc, Devon, Clerk. Nov 7. Tico
hurst and Sons, Cheltenham
f Gazette, Oct. -4. J Andrews, Elizabeth, Sherborne, Dorset, and Benjamin ChandLer, Sherborne, Gent. Nov 1 Ajtstice, Sarah, South Petherton, Somersot. Nov 12. Poole, South Petherton
Barry, John David, Richmond ter, Shepherd's Bash Green, Civil Engineer. Nov L Masterman and Co, New Broad st
Burnaby, Sir William Edward, Junior Carlton Club, Pall Mall, Bart. Nov 11. Garrard and Co, Suffolk st, Pall Mall East
Carter, Elizabeth, Dover. Dec 5. Lewis, Dover
Caktkr, Sophia, Cambridge. Jan 8. Eadeus and Knowlcs, Cambridge
•clark, Charles, Albert rd, Regent's park. Dec 15. Finch and Co, Gray's inn sq
Cockekton, Jonas, Austinfriars, Merchant. Nov 30. Clifford Gosncll, Moorgate st
Cook, Nathanibl, Birkenhead, Chester, Gent. Nov 5. Traftord anil Cook, Northwich
Cooke, Jane, Forest Hill, Kent. Nov 7. Collins and Co, Greenwich
Edgab, Hrxby, Bristol, Captain in her Majesty's 20th Regiment.
Nov 1. Baker and Lang worthy, Bristol Ellerton, George, Kippax, York, Surgeon. Oct 22. Lister,
HfTCHSJT, William Frederick, Manchester, Bookkeeper. Dec 10.
Storer and Lloyd, Manchester Lister, Gkorqe, York, Coal Merchant. Dec 30. Crumbie, York Lister, Mary, York. Dec 30. Crumbie, York
Mann, Ann, Hartlepool, Durham. Nov 21. Bell and Son, West Hartlepool
Masters, William, Whitbourne, Hereford, Gent. Nov 15. Rogers, Tonbridge
Nbwitt, Alexander, Wood Burcote, Towcester, Northampton, Farmer. Nov 5. Whitton, Towcester
Pace, Edmund, Warwick rd, Upper Clapton, Timber Merchant. Nov 5. Tickle, Lawrence lane, Cheapside
Pope, Richard, Stretham-cum.Thetford, Cambridge, Publican. December 1. Archer and Son, Ely
Reap, William, Littletaempstou, Devon, Yooman. Nov 19. Edmonds and Son, Totnes
Rennie, Margaret Anne, Wilton crescent. Nov 14. Palmer and Co, Trafalgar sq
Bbnshaw, John, Calow, Chesterfield, Derby, Farmer. Dec 8.
Bunting, Chesterfield Ridge, William, Pimlico rd, Pimlico, Corn Merchant. Nov 10.
Girling, Chancery lane Bosk, Mabtha, Cheltenham. Nov 15. Wako and Sons, Sheffield
Sharp, Lewis, Cazenove rd, Stamford Hill, Esq. Doc 3. WUdo and Co, College hill
Sheppabd, Eliza Icblt, Buckland ter, Plymouth. Dec 1. Phillips and Sons, Plymouth
Smith, Emma, Elm Cottage, Ealing. Nov 30. Butterfield, Ironmonger lane
Smith, Wllliak, Gwydyr Houses, Brixton Rise, Esq. Nov. 14.
Baker and Co, Lincoln's inn fields Snowdon, John, Gateshead, Durham, Ship Chandler. Nov 30.
Ingledow and Daggett, Newcastle-upon-Tyne Tempest, James, Bradford, York, Yeoman. Nov 10. Lancaster
and Co, Bradford Williams, Jane, Ynysbach, Llandyfrydog, Anglesea. Nov 2.
Owen, High st, Bangor Williams, Rev. Thomas, Northop, Flint, Clerk. Nov 9. Beyfus
and Beyfus, Lincoln's inn fields Yates, GeoHub Hay Smyth, Newton Abbot, Devon, Rctirod Major.
Nov 5. Francis and Co, Newton Abbot
[Gazette, Oct. 7.]
Sonth-Eastern (Lord Coleridge, O.J.)— Norwioh and City, Monday, Ootober 24; Cambridge, Thursday, October 27; Maidstone, Monday, Ootober 31; Chelmsford, Monday, November 7. Oxford (Cottoo, L.J.)—Oxford, Wednesday, Ootober 26; Gloucester and City, Monday, Ootober 31 ; Stafford, Monday, November 7. North and Sontu Wales (Lush, L.J.)—Cheater, Saturday, Ootober22; Swansea, Monday, October 31. Western (Williams, J.)— Bristol, Saturday, Ootober 22; Exeter and City, Saturday, Ootober 29 ; Winchester, Saturday, November 5. Midland (llathew, J.)—Bedford, Tuesday, Ootober 25 ; Leicester and Borougb, Monday, Ootober 31; Nottingham and Towr, Monday, November 7; Warwick, Monday, November 14. North-Eastern (Cave, J.)—Newcastle and Town, Monday, October 24; Durham, Thursday, Ootober 27; York and City, Wednesday, November 2. Northern (Kay, J.)— Carlisle, Monday, Ootober 31; Manchester, Thursday, November 3; Liverpool, Saturday, November 12.
Criminal business only will be taken at tbeee Assizes.
SALE OF ENSUING WEEK. Oct. 26.—Mesare. Kdwin Fox & Boosfield, at the Mart, at 2 fjo., Freehold Estates (see advertisement, this week, p. 9,44)
BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, AND DEATHS.
Chapman.—July 24, at Duneam, New Zealand, the wifo of Frederick Bevana Chapman, of the Inner Temple, barrister, of a son.
Fox —Oct. 13, at 13, Caledonia-place, Clifton, Bristol, the wifo
of Chat lea Edward Fox, of the loner Temple, barrister-at
law, of a daughter. Laino.—Oot. 11, at 46, Ladbroke-grove, W., the wife of John
6. Laing, of Lincoln's-inn, barriater-at-law, of a daughter. Lonomore.—Oct. 10, the wife of Charles Elton Longmore, of
Hertford, solicitor, of a daughter. UnAL.—Oct. 15, at Richmond, Surr -y, the wife of John Sy moods
Uda', of the Inner Temple, barrioier-at-law, of a daughter. MARHIAGKS.
Florence—Barns.—Oct. 6, at St. Marylebone Pariah Church Ernest Badiniua Florence, of 14, Euiperor's-gatc, South Kensington, barriater-at-law, to Ada Constance SedJey Carr Jackarm, daughter of Itjbert Barns, M.D., of Harley-sireet, Cavendiah-Fquare.
Hutchinos—Atkin.—Oct. 6, Charles Robert Hutchinga.M.A. of Bournemouth, solicitor, to Lizetta Mary, daughter of Alfred A. Atkin, of Bayfield, Branksome Park, I"