« PreviousContinue »
Most of the other rules have reference to the
Solicitors' Journal. procedure under section 35 of the Act, relating to the
recovery of sums declared by the Act to be civil debts (1.e., sums recoverable on complaint, and not on infor
mation). The procedure prescribed is a judgment LONDON, DECEMBER 27, 1879. summons, to be (whenever practicable) served personally
on the debtor not less than two clear days before the day on which he is required to appear. Provision is
made for the payment of the amount by the debtor be. CONTENTS.
fore or after he is imprisoned, and for the plaintiff's
costs in endeavouring to enforce the order. CURRENT Topics:
The Rules under the Supreme Court of Judicature (Oficers) Act 157
157 The New Regulations for the Centra: Ofico....................... 157 The scheme of the new regulations for the organiza. Costs in Actions Tried by Juries
157 Costs of Three Counsel.......................................... 158
tion of the Central Ofice of the Supreme Court The House of Lords Sittings .................................... 158 may be shortly stated as follows:--There will be The Vacation Judges ............................................ 158 constituted for all the Divisions of the High Court Raron Huddleston.......................................... The Solicitors' Benevolent Institution.................
158 (1) & Writ, Appearance, and Judgment DepartLEADERS :
ment, the business of which will be the issue of Titles of Newspapers and Books
writs of summons; the entry of writs, appearances, and Farm Leases ..............................
159 GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE....................
judgments; the sealing of notices for service under
161 CACES OF TAN WEEK :
ord. 16, r. 18; the receipt and filing of pleadings, and The Dunkirk Colliery Company v. Lever
the transaction of all business heretofore conducted in Re Skerne Ironworks Company.................................. 161 Re Shire bampton Gas Company ................................ 161
the Record and Writ Office, except such part thereof as is Mycock v. Beatson............................................... 161 transacted in the Record Department. (2) A Summons Long v. Crossley ...
and Order Department, the business of which will be the Williams v. Mayor of Tenby ................................. 162 Millard v. Burroughes...
................. 162 issue of summonses in the Queen's Bench, Common The Mayor and Corporation of Swansea v. Quick
Pleas, and Exchequer Divisions, and the drawing up of Allowance for Income Tax in Respect of Abatements of Rent...... 163 all orders, made either in court or in chambers, of those APPOINTWEN18, ETC............................................. 163 COMPANIES ...
Livisions. (3) A Record Department, the business of ............................................ 164 NEW ORDERS, ETC................................................. 164 which will be the filing of affidavits used in the Chancery, LAW STUDENT'S JOURNAL ...................................... 163
Queen's Bench, Common Pleas, and Exchequer Divisions, COORT PAPERS
166 LONDON GAZETTBS, &c., &c.
and the making or examination of office and certified copies of such affidavits; the making and examination of
copies of depositions, and the custody of exhibits deCASES REPORTED IN THE WEEKLY REPORTER. posited for inspection and copying. (5) A Taxing DeAdams' Trust, In re (Ch.Div. M.R.)..
163 partment, for the taxation of costs in the Queen's Bench, Bolton Benefit Loan Society, la re. Coop v. Booth (Ch.Div. M.R.) 161 Common Pleas, and Exchequer Divisions (except such Brown v. Trotman (Ch.Div. Fry, J.)
costs as have heretofore been taxed in the Queen's De Greuchy v. Wills ard Wife (O.P.Div.)
169 Hardir g, És parte. In re Smith, Fleming, & Co. (App.).......... 158
Remembrancer's Office or the Queen's Coroner's Office). Hawksley v. Bradshaw (Q.B.Div.)
The other departments of the Central Office will, we Kent Tramways Company, In re. Pike's Claims (App.)
158 Midgley and another v. Coppock (App.)
believe, be the Report, Inrolment, Judgments, Bills of Potter . Cotton (App.)
160 Sale, Married Women's Acknowledgments, Queen's Thomas , Appellant (Q.B.Div.)
168 Regent United Service Stores, in re. Ex parte Bentley (Ch.Dir. partments.
will Fry, J.)
afford a sufficient indication of the business to be tran. Singer Manufacturing Company, The, v. Clark (Ex.Div.)...... Walker v. The London Tramways Company (Ch.Div. Ý.R.)...... 163
Bacted in them.
Queer The White Papercratem , blentine Redfern, Respondent
: 168 Remembrancer's, Queen's Coroner's,
and Associates Den
...... 165 ....... 170
ORDER 65 provides that, subject to the provisions of CURRENT TOPICS.
of the Judicature Act, 1875, “the costs of and inci. dent to all proceedings in the High Court shall be in
the discretion of the court, provided that, where IT IS UNDERSTOOD that the new rules under the any action or issue shall be tried by a jury, the costs Supreme Court of Judicature (Officers) Act, 1879, were
shall follow the event, unless, upon application made at considered at a recent meeting of the judges, and that the trial, for good cause shown, the judge before whom certain of the rules, relating to the organization of the such action or issue is tried, or the court, shall otherdepartments of the Central Office of the Supreme Court wise order.” In Collins v. Welch, recently heard by the were signed, and will be shortly made public.
Court of Appeal at Westminster, the action was tried at Croydon in July last, and resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff for £12. Upon the verdict being given,
Mr. Justice Denman said he would consider whether the THE RULES under the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, plaintiff should have his costs or not. The defendant's have appeared, accompanied with a bulky schedule of counsel was in court when the verdict was given, and forms. The first part of the rules has reference to the
was instructed to apply for costs under order 55, but, particulars to be entered in the register of convictions, after the remark of the judge, the plaintiff's counsel rose orders, and other proceedings, to be kept by the justices' and urged several reasons why the plaintiff's costs should clerks under section 22 of the Act, and to the form of the not be disallowed, and eventually, without any applicaaccount to be rendered and kept by these officials of the tion by the defendant's counsel, the judge ordered that fines, fees, and other sums received by them. The form the plaintiff should not have his costs. The Common of security to be given for payment of fines is prescribed, Pleas Division were subsequently asked to set aside this and the mode in which the " security.book" is to be kept, order. On this occasion the court was composed of also the mode of notice of forfeiture of the security. The Grove and Lopes, JJ., who not long before had decided time for application to state a special case, under section the case of Turner v. Heyland (L. R. 4 C. P. D. 432), 33 of the Act, is limited to seven days from the date of the in which the point for decision was practically on all proceeding to be questioned, and the case is to be stated fours with that in Collins v. Welch; and in Turner v. within three calendar months from the date of the 'pli Heyland the court held that, upon the true construction
of order 55, a formal application by the defendant's last Long Vacation as to applications which may require counsel was not a condition precedent to the judge at to be immediately or promptly heard by the Vacation the trial disallowing the plaintiff's costs. In Collins Judges, will hold good for the Christmas Vacation. v. Welch the court said that Turner v. Heyland had never been appealed against, and they were bound by that de. cision. Upon the hearing of Collins v. Welch in the Court BARON HUDDLESTON is making favourable progress to. of Appeal, that tribunal affirmed the decision of the court towards recovery from his illness, and his lordship's below, on the ground that there had been what may be attendants are not without hope that the learned Baron called a constructive application to the judge at the trial, will be able to undertake some part of his circuit and cause had been shown against the order. Lord duties. Justice Bramwell expressed. an opinion that no application was necessary to enable the judge at the trial to
The Solicitors' Benevolent Association has received a disallow the plaintiff's coste. Lords Justices Brett and Cotton, on the other hand, thought that such application late Miss Harriet Hurst, through the kindness of her
gift of £500 Consols from the residuary estate of the was necessary; but as they decided the case on the ground
executors. juet mentioned, the court agreed that it was unnecessary to decide this point. The judgment is not very satisfactory. Collins v. Welch is affirmed on the particular facts, and Turner v. Heyland is not absolutely overruled,
TITLES OF NEWSPAPERS AND BOOKS. for the principle upon which it was decided has the
II. sanction of Lord Justice Bramwell, but it is dissented
Ir the right which can be obtained in a title is a right of from by Lords Justices Brett and Cotton. Both in
property, as was held to be the case in Clement v. Mad. Turner v. Heyland and Collins v. Welch it was strongly dick (1 Giff. 98), and Kelly v. Hutton (16 W. R. 1182, urged that, if a formal application by the defendant's L. R. 3 Ch. 703), and as must be the case if a title is counsel were necessary, injustice might sometimes happen but a species of trade-mark (Leather Cloth Company v.
- for instance, the judge and the counsel might be absent American Leather Cloth Company, 12 W. R. 289, 4 from court when the verdict was given, and the verdict
De G. J. & S. 137, and many other cases), the next might be taken by the associate. This possible state of point to be considered is the mode of acquiring such a things was accepted by the court as an additional reason
right. And in this respect, as well as in others, titles why the judge should use bis discretion as to costs, in
follow the law of trade-marks, with regard to which it was dependently of the making of any application by the de. said by Lord Justice Cairns in Maxwell v. Hogg (15 W. R. fendant's counsel. Curiously enough, this hypothetical case 467, L. R. 2 Ch. 307), that “all the definitions which was anticipated by Lord Justice Amphlett (Baker v.
have been given in this court, of the nature of the right Oakes, L. R. 2 Q. B. D. 171), who was of opinion that the
to protection in the case of trade-marks, seem to me to be application as to costs might be formally made to the
opposed to the idea that protection can be given where officer delegated by the judge to take the verdict."
there has been no sale, or offering for sale, of the articles to which the name is to be attached.”
In the cross-suits of Maxwell v. Hogg and Hogg . THE QUESTION of allowing the costs of three counsel in Maxwell, the question was between persons, on the one the Chancery Division bas advanced another step; hand, who had been the first to register a certain maga. perhaps only to be buffeted back by the Court of Appeal. zine title, “Belgravia,” under the Copyright Acts, and When we last alluded to the matter it was in this also to publish a magazine under that title, though not position : in order to obtain the costs of three counsel until after an interval of some years, and, on the other " there must not only be importance of value, but also band, a person who had himself registered the title and an unusual quantity of evidence, and an unusual call upon gone to considerable expense in advertisements in the the time of counsel from the length of the hearing” (In interval between the registration and the publication by re Lafitte, 24 W. R. 7). And upon the question of fact as the original registrants, and had also actually brought to whether a case is or is not of this description, the out his magazine within a very few days after theirs. decision of the taxing master is final, “ unless some The Lords Justices held that no conclusive right question of law or of principle is involved." (Robinson was conferred, either by the prior registration and short v. Chadwick, 23 SOLICITORS' JOURNAL, 577). Mr. Justice prior publication in the one instance, or by the expendiFry, however, on Saturday last, in a case of Millard v. ture in advertisements in the other. And Lord Justice Burroughes, reversed the decision of a taxing master Turner said that, " in the case of advertisement followed allowing only two counsel, on the ground that it was by publication, the party publishing has given somethe practice in the Common Law Divisions, whenever thing to the world, and there is some consideration more than twenty witnesses were called, to allow the for the world's giving him & right; but in the case costs of three counsel. But as the action was purely one of mere advertisement he has neither given, nor come which would formerly have been called a common law under any obligation to give, anything to the world, so action, the inference which can be safely drawn from the that there is a total want of consideration for the right decision is somewhat limited.
which he claims"; and Lord Justice Cairns added that he was "prepared to hold, without any hesitation, that
the mere intention, and the declaration of intention, to THE RECENT SITTINGS of the House of Lords for the
use a name will not create any property in that name, hearing of appeals during prorogation lasted (with some and to hold also that there can be no protection in this interruptions) for six weeks. The list contained seven court for the intended name during the course of manuteen appeals, and out of this number seven English and facture of the article which is to bear that name.” two Irish cases have been disposod of, while two Scotch Mere advertisement of the intention to use a certain appeals are awaiting judgment. The part-heard case of Dame, when not followed by publication, can, then, give The Commissioners of Public Works v. Dalton, & Angus no right in the name, nor can registration under the v. Dalton has been postponed for the attendance Copyright Acts do so, as was held in the cross-suit cf of the judges, and five other appeals (including the Hogg v. Maxwell, although in that case there had also Clewer Ritual case) have still to be heard.
been a priority in publication, since the priority was very short in point of time, and, such as it was, had been
obtained by somewhat uncandid ineans; and in Corres. THERE WILL BE no special vacation notice published, pondent Newspaper Company v. Saunders (13 W. R. 80 far as concerns the chamber work of the judges of the 804, 11 Jur. N. S. 540), a case in whicly the plaintiffs' Chancery Division, but the regulations issued before the title was registered on April 8, 1864, and their paper
published on May 3, 1865, and the defendants' title was Barily arises, on a dissolution of the partnership, what is registered on March 3, 1865, and their paper published on to become of the paper ? This question was, however, May 6, 1865, Vice-Chancellor Wood had previously held definitely set at rest by the judgment of Lord Romilly in that the plaintiffs were unable to avail themselves of the the “ Household Words" case (Bradbury v. Dickens, 27 entry in the register without actual publication, and, Beav. 53), in which the popular novelist, Charles Dickens, indeed, had doubted whether in any case registration as was the defendant. His lordship there said: “The copyright would protect the title.
property in a literary periodical like this is confined Wben, however, a literary work is actually published purely to the mere title, and the title of this work is under a certain name, and there are no circumstances, as Household Words," and that forms part of the partnere in the two cases last cited, to interfere with the right to ship assets, and must be sold for the benefit of the partners, the name, a species of goodwill grows up, and a right of if it be of any value.” He accordingly held that the property, which may be of considerable value, is acquired. defendant was not at liberty to advertise the disconSo far back as the Chancellorship of Lord Hardwicke, tinuance of the periodical, since that would be to destroy the connection between the name of a newspaper and what was partnership property, although he would be the good will therein was clearly recognized (Gibblett v. justified in advertising simply the termination of his con. Read, 9 Mod. 459), and the importance at the present nection with the paper; and in Dayton v. Wilkes (17 How. day of the goodwill, in which the name is unquestionably Pr. 510), a judge of the Superior Court of New York came included, was only fairly stated by the New York Court to a similar conclusiou that the property in “Porter's of Appeal, in Boon v. Moss (70 N. Y. 465), when the Spirit of the Times” was partnership assets. court said that “the goodwill of a newspaper establish The name of the author of a literary work fills a proment often constitutes its largest value.
There minent place in the title-page, and, though it would is one kind of goodwill which has been said to be only probably not be held to form part of the title (see a probability that customers will resort to the old place; Crookes v. Petter, 6 Jur. N. 8. 1131), is yet intimately and another, far more valuable, when a retiring partner connected with it. It may, in fact, and often does, add agrees not to engage in the same business in competition greatly to its attractiveness, and, when exceptionally with the old establishment. The goodwill of a permanent well known, even replaces it as the selling feature in the newspaper establishment is generally more tangible than work. Protection has, therefore, been given to a poet either."
(Lord Byron v. Johnston, 2 Mer. 29), and a legal author The name and goodwill are not, indeed, sufficiently (archbold v. Sweet, 1 M. & Rob. 162), against the untangible property to be capable of seizure by a sheriff authorized use of their names, and in Clemens v. Such (Ex parte Foss, 2 De G. & J. 230), but they are suffi. (July 11, 1873) the improper use of the nom de plume ciently so to pass to the proprietor's trustee in bank of the comic writer, "Mark Twain,” was restrained by ruptcy, on his becoming unfortunate in business, as the Supreme Court of New York. being "goods and chattels" under the Bankruptcy Acts But the right which an author or editor has to restrain (Longman v. Tripp, 2 Bos. & P. N. R. 67; Ex parte the use of his name may always be limited by contract, Foss), and they are sufficiently so to be assignable by the and, therefore, it was decided in Ward v. Beeton that proprietor (Snowden v. Noah, Hopk. 347; Kelly v. the originator and first proprietor of “Beeton's ChristHutton, 16 W. R. 1182, L. R. 3 Ch. 703; Ward v. mas Annual was not entitled to complain of the conBeeton, 23 W. R. 533, L. R. 19 Eq. 207); and in the tinued publication of the annual under the same title, event of the sale of a newspaper, what is sold “is not of which his own name happened to form part, after he the right to sell one number of it, but continuing to pub. had parted with his property in the periodical. lish it from day to day, it may be as long as the world Io Crookes v. Petter (6 Jur. N. S. 1131) Lord Romilly lasts, under the name by which it has become known," came to the conclusion that the name of an editor, ap. as was said by Vice-Chancellor Malins in Ward v. pearing on the title-page, formed no part of the title, Beeton.
and he, therefore, refused to interfere with the omission If the proprietor makes no disposition of the goodwill of an editor's name from the title-page of a journal, and name, but leaves them undisposed of at his death, where it had been agreed that the title should not be they will pass to his personal representatives with his altered without the mutual consent of the editor and the other personal property, and must similarly be accounted proprietors. for by them (Gibblett v. Read, 9 Mod. 459); but it is fully competent to the owner to dispose of them, if he chooses,
FARM LEASES. by will (Keen v. Harris, cited 17 Ves. 338; McCormick v. M'Cubbin, Ct. of Sess. Cas. 1st ser., I. 541); and if only a part share in the property passes under the will, In our last article we left for consideration the question the executors are nevertheless entitled to sell and realize whether, if covenants prescribing a particular rotation the value of such part share, notwithstanding the oppo. of crops were omitted from farm leases, the landlord sition of the proprietors of the other part, since they are could in any way be protected from the land being im. entitled to derive what benefit they may from the prop- poverished by the tenant. The answer to this question erty which comes to them under the will (McCormick v. appears to divide itself into two heads, relating to the M' Cubbin).
two classes of agricultural tenancies in this country. In Weldon v. Dicks (27 W. R. 639, L. R. 10 Ch. D. 247), As regards tenancies from year to year, the remedy the question was raised how far the proprietor of a book of the landlord is simple. If the provision of the Agriwhich bas been published under a certain title, and has been cultural Holdings Act relating to notice to quit has long out of print, is entitled to restrain the use of the same been excluded, the landlord will have no difficulty in title for a new and entirely different work. In that case speedily dismissing a tenant who is impoverishing the the second edition of the plaintiff's book had been pub- land. And a provision in the lease or agreement that the lished in 1860, and it was not until the year 1875 that landlord shall be able, by notice to the tenant, to be the defendant's work appeared under the same name as a given at any time within the last six calendar months magazine serial story, and it was only in 1877 that it was of the tenancy, to require a special survey to be made published in a separate form. Notwithstanding the long of the farm by two valuers, one to be appointed by each apparent neglect of his property by the plaintiff, the party, who shall have power to assess damages for im. court declined to hold that he had surrendered his poverishment or ill condition of the land, such damages rights in respect of the name, and an injunction was to be paid to the landlord, or 'retained out of any com. awarded.
pensation which may be payable to the outgoing tenant More usually than not the right in the goodwill and under the custom of the country, would probably afford title of a newspaper becomes the property of several a sufficient remedy for any deterioration of the land joint proprietors, and in such cases the question neces. occurring before the determination of the yearly tenancy.
The case of leases of farms for terms of years occasions the hay, turnips, mangold wurzel, and muck to be left at more difficulty. The lessor cannot be expected to give the end of the tenancy, the person or persons making up the cultivation covenants, and place his land for several such valuation shall take into consideration “the state, years at the mercy of a tenant without taking substantial condition, and usage of the farm and premises, and de. guarantees against deterioration of the land. How are termine whether
the farm is then in a clean these to be obtained ? Now, on this matter some things and creditable state; and, if not, shall determine what are evident. It is tolerably plain that in leases for terms of sum of money shall be paid to the landlord as compensayears no mode of protection which can only be obtained tion therefor, and shall deduct such sum from the amount through the intervention of an inquiry into the state of the which the hay, turnips, mangold wurzel, and muck shall land by valuers or a jury, will be satisfactory to landlords. be adjudged to be worth.” Proof that the land is falling off in condition is, at all Four years would, however, even with these preevents in the earlier stages of the process, difficult, and, cautions, be too short a time to restore to good con where the penalty is forfeiture of the lease, rigid proof is dition a farm which had been improperly cultivated for necessarily required. The landlord may be satisfied that sixteen years; moreover, by the death of the tenant the tenant is not cultivating his land properly, but he during that term the landlord may have imposed upon may be unable to make this out so clearly as to satisfy him an occupant of the land bound by no restrictions as valuers or a jury that the tenant ought to be deprived of to cultivation, yet of whose skill in the management of his larm. Hence, the suggestion that where cultivation a farm he knows nothing. Accordingly, by clause 10, covenants aro dispensed with the landlord should have the landlord reserves to himself the power at any time power to re-enter, in case two valuers, to be nominated during the first sixteen years of the term, by notice in by the county court judge of the district or some other writing, to require that the arable lands shall be brougat disinterested official, should certify that the farm has | into the four-course system ; and “the tenant, on receipt bon cultivated in a manner likely to impoverish the soil, of such notice, or in the event of the death of the tenant, appears to be unpractical. It would only be in extreme his executors or administrators, without notice, shall cases that valuers could be brought to condemn the bring the arable lands into the four-course system ; and tenant to forfeiture of his lease.
from such time he or they shall continue so to farm the The remedy must be in the hands of the landlord; lands-namely, the one-fourth part in winter corn, but it must not be in excess of the evil it is intended to
upon olland or grass of one year's lying, shall immeprevent. It would be obviously unfair to the tenant diately after such winter corn be summer-tilled and that he should be liable to be ejected or fined on the
sown with turnips or mangold wurzel, and then sown mere suspicion of the landlord. But there can be no
with barley or other spring corn, and laid down for one hardship, so far as we can see, in leaving an option to year with a sufficient quantity of good clover or grass the landlord, if and when he has reason to suppose
seeds.” Moreover, after such notice, or on the decease that the tenant is impoverishing the land, and on due
of the tenant, and during the last four years of notice to the tenant, to reimpose the cultivation cove
the term, the tenant, or his executors or administrators, nants which, in reliance on the skill and honesty of the
are bound to consume on tbe farm all the produce, and tenant, he has conditionally consented to abandon. It is subjected to other usual restrictions and obligations to not likely that a landlord will reimpose these fetters
be found in the old farm lease. It appears to us that on a tenant who keeps his land clean and well tilled ;
in some such direction as this there is to be found the there can be no motive for his doing so; but the fact
solution of the difficulty of reconciling freedom of that the landlord has this power will not be without its
cultivation with security against impoverishment of the
land. influence on the practice of even the best tenant. With regard to the manner in which the arrangement we suggest
One other matter relating to farm leases has been should be carried out, the form of lease which during the brought prominently into notice by the recent extralast eight years has been in actual use on the Holkham
ordinary seasons. It is singular that among the estate of the Earl of Leicester affords very valuable
numerous provisions which have been added to these suggestions. The scheme of this lease is to afford the
instruments by the ingenuity of conveyancers, so little utmost freedom of cultivation to a tenant who keeps the
attention should have been devoted to the obligation of land in good order, at the same time reserving to the
the tenant to keep the land free from weeds. This is, landlord the right at any time to reimpose the ancient
of course, of special importance at the end of a lease, restrictions in case the mode of cultivation should appear
when the temptation to the tenant to neglect this to be su as to impoverish the land.
matter is strongest, and no lease for a term of years The way in which this is worked out is, shortly, as follows.
should be granted without some such provision as that By the first clause of the agreement it is provided that the properly cleaned and weeded during the last two years
“the tenant shall have all the crops upon the farm tenancy is to be fortwenty years, commencing, &c., but to be terminable at the end of sixteen years at the request of the
of the tenancy; and the landlord shall have the power tenant, with the consent of the landlord, “with the in
to do this work at the expense of the tenant, if it be tention that the landlord shall then, if he think fit, landlord or his agent.”
not effectually done upon notice in writing from the grant a new lease from the end of the sixteenth year, at the old rent for the first four years of the new term, and for the remainder of the term at the rent that may then be agreed upon.” The object of this provision will be The health of Mr. Cole, Q.C., M.P., has improved, and seen from elause 6, which provides that the tenant is to Sir William Jenner considers him now ont of danger. cultivate and manage the farm during the first sixteen It is stated that the authorities of the post-office are years of the term according to his own judgment, and about to issue a now penny postage-stamp. It is said to to have full power during such time to dispose of all or be a great improvement upon the present stamp in form,
the wise. But during the last four years of the term the
dust red with which letter-writers are familiar, and the tenant is to bring the arable lands into the four
gum seems also to be of better quality. course system of husbandry practised in Norfolk. The Police-court, Mr. W. Bruce, stipendiary magistrate, said:
On Wednesday morning, at the sitting of the Leeds result is that, if the landlord is satisfied with the con
I have received a circular from the Home Office this morndition of the farm at the end of the first sixteen years,
ing informing me that the Recorder of Leeds will on the he will renew the lease; if he is not satisfied, he
1st of January, 1880, be appointed Director of Pablio Pro. will simply refuse to grant a new lease, and then
secutions for Eogland and Wales. Mr. Broce added: I the tenant will be compelled to bring his land into have known Mr. Maule, Q.C., professionally since 1858, the four-course system. By way of further precaution and I may perhaps be allowed to say that in my humble it is provided that when any valuation shall be made of 1 opinion no better appointment could have been made.
COMPANY-LIQUIDATION-RECONSTRUCTION- ASSENT OF General Correspondence.
SHAREHOLDERS-COMPANIES Act, 1862, s. 89.-In a case of
on the 19th inst., a motion was made on behalf of a committee IN RE THRIFT.
of shareholders to stay all further proceedings in the liquida[To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.]
tion of the company ; that the liquidator might be ordered
to deliver over the property of the company to the directors ; Sir, I see a report in a recent issue of the WEEKLY
that a meeting might be held for the appointment of new REPORTER of Ex parte Kimber, In re Thrift, heard before directors, and that in the meantime the old directors might the Court of Appeal.
exercise the powers given them by the memorandum and Lord Justice Brett said to me, “ You may take it, Mr. articles. The winding-up order was made in May last, and Kimber, that your proof was wrongfully rejected." This at a subsequent meeting of shareholders it had been resolved was practically a decision in my favour.
to reconstruct the company on a new basis. One of the Lord Justice James is rightly reported 'to have said,
parties largely interested had bought up all the debts, except "If he had made no delay and had applied immediately
a small amount, which he undertook to pay or compound, and after the rejection of his proof, the court might have
the same gentleman also undertook to pay or satisfy the taken a different view." Now, there was no evidence
present debenture holders in the company. As to the share
holders, nearly half assented to the new scheme of reconstrucwhatever that I had made delay; on the contrary all
tion, but the liquidator bad received some notices of dissent the documents showed that the appeal was made with
from sbareholders, and on the hearing of the motion he subthe utmost dispatch. The delay occurred, if any, in the mitted the question to the court whether or not the other hearing of the appeal after it was set down.
shareholders had had the matter sufficiently explained to His lordship is rightly reported to have said that them, and had had sufficient time to enable them to judge of " under the circumstances we must follow the settled the propriety of the scheme. There was a question raised as practice." Now, I venture to think that the settled to whether the mode in which the company had been propractice is, and always has been, in accordance with E.
nioted had been clearly enough brought to their notice. parte Crowther, decided by the Chief Judge. It has
JESSEL, M.R., was of opinion, on the documents, that the over and over again been held that the Act of Parlia
matter had not sufficiently been brought before the nonment was imperative, and could not be departed from,
assentiog shareholders, and he, therefore, directed a meeting and that a majority of creditors controlled the choice. disas
of the sbareholders to be held, at wbich the matter might be
• discussed, and he allowed the further hearing of the motion As the appointment of the trustee would have been to stand over till after that time. He also directed the altered had my proof not been wrongfully rejected, it liquida:or not to take any steps in the winding up in the seems clear that the application to vacate the trustee was meantime. The 89th section of the Companies Act, 1862, the proper form in which such an application should be under which the motion was made, gives the court power “at made.
any time after an order has been made for winding up a Immediately after the decision was pronounced, I company, upon the application of any creditor or contributory applied to their lordships for leave to appeal to the of the company, and upon proof to the satisfaction of the House of Lords, but I am scrry to say this leave was
company, that all proceedings in relation to such winding-up refused. I do not know why it should have been re
should be stayed, to make an order staying the same either fused, as the question is one seriously affecting both the
altogether or for a limited time, on such terms, and subject public and the profession and the administration of the
to such conditions as it deems fit.” law of bankruptcy.
COMPANY - APPLICATION FOR SHARES - ALLOTMENT 22, Queen-street, E.C.
POSTING OF LETTER-NON-RECEIPT BY APPLICANT-Evi. DENCE.—In a case of Re Shirshampton Gas Company, also before the Master of the Rolls on the 19th inst., & question arose whether the posting of a letter of allote
ment to a contributory had been sufficiently proved so as Cases of the Jueek. to bring the case within the authority of Household Fire
Insurance Company v. Grant (L. R. 4 Ex. D. 216), and to CONTRACT FOR DELIVERY OF GOODS BY INSTALMENTS
fix the allottee to the contract. A motion was made by BREACH-MEASURE OF DAMAGES-MARKET PRICE.-In a
certain contributories to strike their names off the share case of The Dunkirk Colliery Company v. Lever, before the
register of the company, which was now in liquidation, on Court of Appeal on the 19th inst., a question arose as to
the ground that they had not received any notice of allotthe propor measure of damages in the case of a breach of a
ment of the sbares. They all swore positively they had contract for the delivery of goods by instalments. The
never received by post any notice of the allotment. The contract was entered into in April, 1875, and by it the
secretary of the company was called and proved that the plaintiffs agreed to sell, and the defendant agreed to buy,
letters of allotment were all sent out together; that by his 15,000 tons of Cannel coal, to be delivered at the pit siding
direction his son, who was now abroad, had addressed them at the rate of 300 tons per week, at the price of 26s. per
in his presence; that he had stamped them in his presence; too. The defendant afterwards refused to perform the
and that he had then acccompanied his son, who had the agreement, and the main question was as to the damages to
letters in a basket, to the post-office; that he saw his son which the plaintiffs were entitled, the price of the coal
go into the office and return without the letters of allot. having fallen considerably. It appeared that there was no
inent. It was proved that others of the allottees had duly regular market for that description of coal. The defendant
received their letters of allotment. The secretary also broke the contract in July, 1875. The plaintiffs in Feb
produced a diary in which an optry appeared on the date of Tuary, 1876, succeeded in selling 15,000 tons of the coal to
the posting of an amount paid for stamps. JESSEL, M.R., the Corporation of Manchester at 198. per ton. They had
was of opinion that the posting wus sufficiently proved; he previously made several unsuccessful endeavours to obtain a
said there was no law as to the amount of proof required, higher price. Jessel, M.R., was of opinion that the plain
and sitting as a jury, he was of opinion there was sufficient tiffs had acted reasonably and properly, and that the true
in the present case. The secretary could not say he had measure of damages was the difference between the 26s. and
actaally seen the letters posted, but the fact of the addressthe 193. per ton, and this decision was affirmed by the
ing, stamping, and taking to the post by one whose duty it Court of Appeal (James, BAGGALLAY, and THESIGER,
was were distinctly proved. The entry in the diary was L.JJ.). Both the Master of the Rolls and the Court of
conclusive, and he should not require the evidence of the Appeal held that the defendant could not require the
son to be taken. The motion must, therefore, be refused, plaintiffs to alter their accustomed mode of conducting their
with costs. His lordship also said his impression was the business—.g., that it was no objection to the price which
applicants did receive the letters of allotment. they bad obtained from the corporation that they did not advertise the coal for sale, they not having been previously
RESCISSION OF AGREEMENT FOR PARTNERSHIP-FRAUDin the habit of advertising their coal.
LIEN FOR PURCHASE-MONEY ON PARTNERSHIP ASSETS.-lo a case of Mycock v. Beatson, before Fry, J., on the 19th iost., the action was brought for the resoission of an agreement for