Page images
PDF
EPUB

the contrary was shown. No defence to the landlord's claim bad, however, The amount due to a third mortgagee was £4,000. The plaintiffs presented a been suggested.

| petition in the action asking that, instead of working out the judginent in the Another point raised was that the right to re-enter arose only on the com- ordinary way, an order might be made for the sale of the property. Kay, J., pady being “wound up"-1.6., completely wound up- and not upon the thought that there was no jurisdiction under section 25 to order a sale efter a making of a winding-up order. As to this JESSEL, M.R., said tbot the object judgment for foreclosure or redemption had been given, and he refused the of the clause must be regarded, and the right of re-entry obviously must arise application. In the Court of Appeal reference was made to Girdleston v. when an order to wind up the company was made. When it was fully wound Lavender (9 Hare, App. 53), in wbich Turner, V.O., held that, under section up all its property would bave been sold, of course the lease could not be 48 of the Act of 1852, there was no power to order a sale after a foreclosure sold while the lessor's right to re-enter existed, and on that construction the decree had been made, and to Laslett v. Cliffe (2 W. R. 536, 2 Dr. & Sm. proviso would have no meaning at all.-SOLICITORS, Worthington Evans ; 278), in which Stuart, V.C., was of a contrary opinion. The subsequent T. C. Russel.

mortgagees did not oppose the application. The Court of Appeal (JESSEL,

M.R., and BRETT, and HOLKER, L.JJ.) held that there was jurisdic. PRACTICE-INJUNCTION-NUISANCE-DISCONTINUANCE OF NUISANCE BE

tion to make the order. JesSEL, M.R., said he thought that, according PORE TRIAL.-In a case of Slack v. The Midland Railway Company, before

to the true construction of section 25 of the Act of 1881, there was the Court of Appeal on the 31st olt., the question arose whether an injunc

nothing to prerent the court from making an order for sale until the tion ought to be granted to restrain a nuisance, when the nuisance, though it

foreclosure had become absolute, when, of course, there would be an existed wben the writ was issued, has ceased before the trial of the action.

end of it. Why should the court cut down the meaning of the section and The action was brought to restrain the defendants from fouling a stream by

say that it did not apply after judgment for foreclosure as well as before ? discharging into it gas-tar from some gasworks belonging to ibem, and for

No time was limited by the Act. It allowed a mortgagor who could not find damages. The action was commenced early in the year 1879. The defend

the money to pay off the mortgage to have the property sold, and it gave the ents had constructed a wall and a drain to prevent the escape of tar from

same liberty to the mortgagee. It brought our luw more into accordance with their gasworks into the river, and these alterations were completed on the 30th

that of continental nations, which did not allow foreclosore at all. He thought of May, 1879. When the action was tried by Fry, J., in November, 1880,

the Legislature had intrusted the court with the discretion to make an order tbere was evidence that, shortly after the completion of the new wall, tar had |

for sale at any time duriog the action, and the court could impose terms. Ofzed through it into the stream. Fry, J., beld that the pollution of the

Therefore, the order asked for might be made. As to the cases which had stream had been caused by the defendants' works, and he granted an injunc.

been referred to, they arose under another Act, which differed materially in its tion and an inquiry as to damages, and ordered the defendants to pay the

terms from the Act of 1881; and, moreover, the two decisions were opposed to costs of the action. The Court of Appeal (JESSEL, M.R., and Brett and

each other, and they were not bioding on the Court of Appeal, which could HOLKER, L.JJ.) discharged the injunction, but did not otherwise vary the

adopt either of them. But it was not necessary to rely on authority, inasmuoh judgment, and they gave no costs of the appeal. JESSEL, M.R., said that the

as the two Acts differed in their language. BRETT, L.J., said that the Act principal object of the action was to obtain an injunction. There was no

was an enabling and remedial one, and he saw no reason for cutting down its evidence that between the 8th of June, 1879, and the trial in November,

large words. The order would be made “ in the action," and the words of the 1980--that is, during a period of Duarly eighteen months after the completion

section were wide enough to justify the court in making an order for sale at of the defendants' new works—there had been any escape of gas-tar into the

any stage of the action before it was finally concluded. He thought this was stream. The nuisance must have been effectually put a stop to for nearly

the true construction of the section, construing it according to the ordinary rules eighteen months. There was, tberefore, no continuing nuisance at the time

for the construction of an enabling statute. Section 48 of the Act of 1852 of the trial, and his lordship could see no reason in tbe world why the injunc

contained the words " instead of a foreclosure,” which were very pregnant tion should bave been granted at the trial, or why it should be now

words, and he thought that they had been designedly omitted from the present continued. It could not be said that it would do the defendants no harm if

Act.

The petitioners asked they had put a stop to the nuisance, for, if the injunction remained in force,

by their petition that the property might be and there was the slightest escape of gas-tar into the stream from whatever

| ordered to be sold out of court, either by public auction or by private contract as cause, the plaintiffs would be able at once to come to the court with an

the petitioners sbould think fit, and that they might be authorized to receive application for a sequestration agaiost the defendants' property, on the ground

and give receipts for the purchase-moneys, and to convey the property to the that they had committed a breach of the injunction.-SOLICITORS, Beale,

purchasers, and to retain the amount due to them, they undertaking to pay Marigold, g Co.; Field, Roscoe, & Co.

any surplus into court. The Court beld that this might be done as the other
mortgagees did not object, and the order was accordingly made in that form.-

SOLICITORS, Bolton & Co.; Makinson & Carpenter.
MORTGAGOR AND MORTGAGEE-FORECLOSURE OR REDEMPTION ACTION-
ORDER FOR SALE, JURISDICTION-CONVEYANCING Act, 1881 (44 & 45
Vict. C. 41), 8. 25.-In a case of The Union Bank of London v. Ingram,

PRACTICE-ADMINISTRATION Action—MINUTES OF JUDGMENT-JODICAbetore the Court of Appeal on the 1st inst., a question arose as to the extent

TURE ACT, 1875, s. 10.-In an action, In re Murray. Woods v. Greenwell, of the power given to the court by section 25 of the Conveyancing Act,

before Hall, V.C., on the 28th olt., being an ordinary administration action by 1881, to make an order in a foreclosure or redemption action for the sale of

creditors, it was proposed to include in the minutes of judgment a declaration

that, in case the est te should prove to be insufficient for the payment in full the mortgaged property-viz., whether such an order can be made after judg.

of the debts and liabilities, the rules in force under the law of bankruptcy as ment for foreclosure or redemption has been given at the trial. Section 25

to the respective rights of secured and unsecured creditore, &c., should be provides (inter alia) that, “(1) Any person entitled to redeem mortgaged

observed (following the statutory words in the Judicature Act, 1875, s. 10). property may have a judgment or order for sale instead of for redemption

The declaration was in the form inserted in the judgment in a similar action, in an action brought by him either for redemption alone or for

In re Hildich, Hipkins v. Hildich (29 W. R. 733), and had in that case been sale alone, or for sale or redemption in the alternative. (2) In any action, whether for foreclosure, or for redemption, or for sale, or for the

directed to be included in the minutes as necessary and proper. In the pre

sent case, however, counsel submitted to the Vice-Chancellor whether such a raising and payment in any manner of mortgage money, the court, on the

declaration was correct, being merely the expression of the statutory prorequest of the mortgagee, or of any person interested either in tbe mortgage

vision, and HALL, V.C., directed that it should be omitted from the minutes money or in the right of redemption, and notwithstanding the dissent of any other person, and notwithstanding that the mortgagee or any person so

as being altogether unnecessary.-SOLICITORS, Dangerfield & Blyth; J. f E. interested does not appear in the action, and without allowing any time

Scott; Cunliffe, Beaumont, & Davenport ; Phillips. for redemption or for payment of any mortgage money, may, if it thinks fit, direct a sale of the mortgaged property on such terms as it thinks fit, PRACTICE-SOLICITOR AND CLIENT-SOLICITOR REPRESENTING PARTIES including, if it thinks fit, the deposit in court of a reasonable sum, fixed WITHOUT AUTHORITY-Costs.-13 an action of De Senger v. Waller, and by the court, to meet the expenses of sale, and to secure performance of In the Matter of x. Y., a Solicitor, before Hall, V.O., on the 26th ult., a the terms. (3) But in an action brought by a person ioterested in the right motion was made on behalf of parties having liberty to attend the proceedings of redemption, and seeking a sale, the court may, on the application of for liberty to be granted them to attend the proceedings by a new solicitor, any defendant, direct the plaintiff to give such security for costs as the that X. Y. migbt be ordered to refund certain moneys which he had received court thinks fit, and may give the conduct of the sale to any defendant, and out of court, and might pay the applicants their costs as between solicitor and may give such directions as it thinks fit respecting the costs of the client, and the other respondents on the motion their costs as between party defendants or any of them. (4) In any case within this section the and party. The circumstances were briefly as follows:--X. Y., who was a coort may, if it thinks fit, direct & sale without previously defendant to the above action, and a trustee of the settlement, for the execution determining the priorities of incumbrancers." By section 48 of the trusts of which the action had been instituted, was a solicitor who, for a of the Chancery Amendment Act of 1852 (repealed by the Act of number of years, had acted as the solicitor to several of the parties interested 1881) it was provided that it sbould be lawful for the Court of Chancery, under the truste. One of the objects of the action was to charge the trustees " in any suit for the foreclosure of the equity of redemption in any mort- | with certain balances. The applicants upon the present motion were persons gaged property, upon the request of the mortgagee, or of any subsequent in. resident abroad, who were interested under the trusts in two-fifths of the cambrancer, or of the mortgagor, or any person claiming under them respec trust properties, and were near relatives of the family for certain members of tively, to direct a sale of such property instead of a foreclosure of such which, including the applicants' father, X. Y. had acted as solicitor. X. Y. equity of redemption, on such terms as the court may think fit to direct." had, without retainer or other authority, constituted himself solicitor for the The action was brought by second mortgagees against the first mortgagee, I applicants, and obtained leave for them to attend the proceedings in the action, other mortgagees subsequent to themselves, and the mortgagor, claiming to and had acted therein in their behalf; and under the order on further conredeem the first mortgagee, and to foreclose the other mortgagees and the sideration certain moneys had been paid out of court to him for the costs so mortgagor in default of redemption. At the trial judgment for foreclosure was incurred by him on their behalf, and for part of their shares in the trust fund. given in the ordinary form. Afterwards the plaintiffs paid the first mortgagee These facts baving corze to the applicants' knowledge, they served the present what was found due to him on taking the account under the judgment, and notice of motion upon X, Y. and the plaintiff and defendants in the the first mortgagee transferred his security to thep laiutiffs. There was then due action, instead of applying for the usual order to change solicitors. X. Y. to the plaintiffs more than £23,000, and the property was worth only £14,000. justified his conduct by explaining that he had considered himself to be acting for the family generally, and had, in fact, by his exertions, greatly benefited the applicants. HALL, V.C., considered that, however bona fide bis conduot,

COUNTY COURTS. X. Y., having, in fact, acted without authority, bad done so at the risk of his

MANCHESTER. proceedings not being adopted, and the order must be made as asked.

(Before JOAN ARCHIBALD RUSSELL, Esq., Q.C., Judge.) SOLICITORS, Gard, Corbin, Hall; Hores & Pattison ; C. M. Hotson.

January 5.-Denton West End Permanent Building Society v. Tilzey.
This was an action brought by the landlords of a dwelling house at Marple

against the defendant, the trustee under resolutions for liquidation by arrangeVENDOR'S LIEN FOR UNPAID PURCHASE-MONEY - SUB-PURCHASER

ment of the affairs of one G. F. Robinson, to recover £6, one quarter's rent of NOTICE THROUGH AGENT-CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE-LAND IN REGISTER

the premises accruing between June 24 and September 29 last. COUNTY-PURCHASER FOR VALUE WITHOUT NOTICE.ONUS PROBANDI

A. L. Stocks (Parker & Stocks), solicitor, for the plaintiffs. In a case of Kettlewell v. Watson, before Fry, J., on the 30th ult., some im.

T. Davy (Sale & Co.), solicitor, for the defendant. portant questions arose

The facts were as follows:-In May last the debtor, being yearly tenant of as to the effect of the registration of à conveyance of land situate in a register coucty upon the right

the premises, filed his petition for liquidation, and in the following month the of the vendor to enforce his lien for unpaid purobase-money against

delendant was appointed trustee. He had a valuation made of the debtor's sub-purchasers from the original purchaser, and as to imputed and

furniture wbich was op the plaintiffs' premises, and, pending negotiations for constructive notice. Some land situate in the suburbs of Leeds, in

sale to a person on behalf of the debtor, allowed bim to remain in possession. the West Riding of Yorkshire, was sold to some estate agents, who bought

Plaintiffs' agent repeatedly requested the debtor to pay the rent due on June it with the intention of selling it again in lots for building purposes.

24, and being unable to obtain payment threatened a distress, whereupon the

The purchase deed contained a receipt signed by the vendors for the whole pur.

trustee (the defendant) on September 21 paid such rent to preserve the propobase-money, but in fact only a part of it was paid. The deed was retained by

erty. The negotiations for sale to the debtor's friends went off, and, on Septhe vendors in order to protect their lien, but, at the request of the purchasers,

tember 28, the goods were sold by auction, removed, and the key given up. they registered a memorial of the deed in the West Riding Registry. The

Stocks, relying on the case of Wilson v. Wallani (28 W. R. 597), con. purchasers then sold the property to various sub-purchasers in small lots, and

tended that the trustee was personally liable.

Bis HONOUR diysented from the ruling in Wilson v. Wallini, and was of the sub-purchasers built on their respective lots.“ The balance of the original purchase-money was not paid, and the origioal purchasers became bankrupt.

opinion that the decision in Ex parte Davies, Re Sneezum (25 W. R. 49, L. R. The original vendore brought the action against a number of the sub-purchasers,

3 Ch. D. 463), was the better law. He wished to express ro opinion as to what alleging that they had bought their lots with constructive notice of the

the defendant's position would bave been bad he been called upon to disclaim plaintiffs' lien, and claiming to enforoe the lien by sale of the defendants'

aud bad not done so, but the payment by the defendant, he considered, was made plots respectively. On behalf of all the defendants, it was con

by bim as trustee and not as tenant. The mere making of a valuation and tended that, the land being in a register county, there was an

selling the furniture on the premises was not such a taking possession or adop. obligation on the vendors to bave some evidence in writing of their

tion of the tenancy as to make the defendant responsible for rent, and he lien wbich could be registered, and that their allowing the deed to be regis.

accordingly nonsuited the plaiotiffs, with costs. tered in the ordinary way, without any notice of the lien, amonnted to a representation by them that the purchasers were entitled to the land free from any lien, and that by their conduct the plaintiffs had lost their lien as against the sub-purcbasers. Fry, J., refused to adopt this view, but held that the

THE INFLUENCE OF THE LEGAL registration of the deed did not amount to any notice to third parties that the purchasers were entitled to the property free from a vendor's lien, and that

PROFESSION ON THE STATE. the vendors were under no obligation to procure any written evidence of their lien. Some of the sub-purchasers had, on purchasing their lots, employed no At the annual dinner of the Birmingham Law Students' Society on Tuesday solicitor, but had (to use their own words) left it to the original purchaser Sir Hardinge Giffard, Q.C., M.P., in proposing the toast of the evening, "to manage the business for them." In these cages FRY, J., held that the called attention to the fact that in nothing was the Anglo-Saxon character sub-purobeseis had made the original purchasers their general agents to carry and the practical good sense of the nation more conspicuous than in the out the trai saction, and that, consequently, it was the duty of the agents to growth of our jurisprudence. It was not fettered by mere verbal definitions, communicate to their principals the existence of the vendor's lien, but was a principle susceptible of growth. The very principles upon which and in such a case the presumption was irrebattable that the com our law was founded were still in full vigour and life amongst us. It had munication was made, and, consequently, notice of the lien must be been a system of voluntary and spontaneous growth with the law as with the imputed to the principals, and the plaintiffs were entitled to enforce lawyers. If anyone looked at the earlier history and saw in what way the tbe lien as against them. In other cases the sub-purchasers had great profession had grown up, it would be observed that it was not upon the authorized the original purchasers to employ their solicitor to prepare the patronage of any great personages, but by the voluntary association of persons conveyances to them, paying the original purchasers a small charge for the taking an interest in the study and practice of the law. They had formed purpose, but they had not in any other way employed a solicitor or other agent their influences, they had made themselves a place in the State, so that in in the matter. In these cases FRY, J., held that the duty of the solicitor beiog time to come the governing bodies of the State remitted the discipline and only to prepare the conveyance, it was no part of his duty to communicate the education of the professors of the law to those who were in their origin mere lien to the sub-purchasers ; consequently, notice of the lien could not be im- volanteers associated together without the anthority of Government, puted to the sub-purchasers through the solicitor. These were cases of pur very much after the manner of the London Guilds, who were granted cbasers for very small sums, such as £40 or £50, and the purchasers in no way privileges from the State because of the influence they had them. investigated the title or made any inquiries about the deeds. FRI, J., said that selves acquired by their spontaneous Co-operation. He was anxious in such cases, baring regard to the small amount of the purchase to point out that that principle, considering what our national money, and to the fact that the employment of a solicitor to in life wað, ought to exist now. Speaking of the lawyers as a vestigate the title would have gost probably more than the value of the body it did not. Considering the extent and degree of the profession property purcbased, he could not hold that the persons who had thus to which they belonged, their position in the State, their educaomitted to make inquiries had wilfully shut their eyes in order not to acqnire tion and intelligence as individuals, there was no body in the country who information, and voless he could come to this conclusion, he could not hold bad so little influence upon the matter with which they were immediately that they bad constructive notice of the lion. In these cases, therefore, he connected as the profession of the law. He saw every kind of association held that the plaintiffs could not enforce their lien. It was proved that the listened to with respect, and when their views were put forward in Parliament original purchasers bad, with the plaintiffs' consent, sold two lots to persons pot or elsewhere, if they were applicable to the particular calling with wbich they parties to the action free from the lien, and it was argued that by so doing the were concerned, they were regarded with iofioite deference ; but when be plaintiffs had in effect given up their lien as against the other sub-purchasers. cast his eyes upon the legal profession it was rather put as a sneer that this It was not, however, shown that, when the plaintiffs did this, they had or that view was the view of a lawyer, rather than as a view which ought to any notice of the sale of other lots, and for this reason Fry, J., held that the prevail when the amendment or alteration of the law was uoder discussion. He plaintiffs could not be taken to have waived their lien. A question thought retribution had come upon the country for that neglect of one of its also arose as to the onus probandi of a purchase for value of the legal estate most intelligent classes. He not only referred to such subjects as bankwithout notice. A purchaser of one lot afterwards mortgaged it. Both ruptcy, joint-stock banks, limited liability companies, for there was bardly the mortgagor and the mortgagee were made defendants to the action. one technical subject with which the Legislature had thought fit to deal that The plaintiffs alleged that both the mortgagor and the mortgagee had, it had not made an extraordinary and clumsy muddle of. So from when they acquired their interests, notice of the lien, and adduced time to time we had the repeal, the partial repeal, the amended repeal, and evidence to prove tbis. It was proved that the mortgagee bad notice, but finally the whole mass of rubbish was swept away to give rise to a new the plaintiffs did not succeed in proving that the mortgagor had any era of amendment in wbich the same process was repeated over notice. And, on behalf of the mortgagee it was then urged that, inas- and over again. He was amused sometimes when he heard the much as he derived title through a purchaser for value without notice, he phrases he did bear in a certain place with reference to the suggestions of was protected, though he himself had notice. To this it was replied that lawyers. A lawyer was not entitled to respect, for some reason which those the onus was on the mortgagee, when it was shown that be bad taken bis who were not lawyers were able to explain, but which those who were security with notice, to prove that his mortgagor was a purchaser for value lawyers were unable to do. Perhaps the most commonly urged reproach without notice, and that he had adduced no evidence of this. Fry, J., held that, was that lawyers knew nothing about politics, Wbat magic influ-nce inasmuch as the plaintiffs had by the allegations in their pleading and by it was which invested everybody but a lawyer with political associations he did adducing evidence in support of them, taken on themselves the onus of not know. He thought they bad to some extent got rid of the old dramatio proving that the mortgagor had notice, the mortgagee was not bound to notion of the writers of fictivo who, as a matter of course, made the villain of prove that he had none. -SOLICITORS, Paterson, Snow, d Bloxam ; Ridsdale, their plot a lawyer. He believed it bad got to be recognized in these later Craddock & Ridsdale ; Layton & Jaques; J. W. Hick in; Ashurst, Morris, & days Ibat it was possible a lawyer might be an honest man. If he were not, Co., Torr d Co.

he (the speaker) was bound to say a lawyer was much worse than other men,

for it was the function of the law to strip off that bazy view of their own cases for work actually done in the country, your committee concurred in the rights which occasionally prevented people seeing what they were doing soundness of the principle that as a general rule London agents should only According to his own experience, the shabby thing, the sharp practice, the charge for work actually done by them, and intimated to the Liverpool Law technicality that defeated justice, and the evasion which delayed it, came in Society that they would be prepared to take any steps in conjunction with pine cases out of ten from the laity, and not from the lawyer. It had occurred other societies wbich might be considered desirable for obtaining the general to him more than once that the influence of the legal profession upon the Stato recognition of the principle. was not what it should be, and he thought one reason for this was tbat tbere Services of notices of incumbrances on solicitors of trustees and the case of was no authoritative exposition of what was the opinion of the profession. He Raynor v. The Saffron Waldon Building Society. The effect of this case on was, of course, not insensible to the fact that of his own branch of the profession the practice of solicitors accepting services of notices of incumbrances on behalf the Attorney.General was the official exponent, but he was simply the official of their clients was considered by your committee, and they resolved that having exponent, while with respect to the other branch there was no authoritative regard to the decision in that case such practice could not safely be continued. exponent. There was besides no union between the two branohes They however recommended that, in all cases where the parties to be served which enabled them to learn each other's common opinion upon proposed were known to bave a solicitor, service of any notice should be effected through changes or alterations in the law. It seemed to him a serious matter, gravely such solicitor, and suggested that the most convenient course would be to pressing for the attention of every lawyer, that while every kind of industry request such solicitor to attend upon his clients and obtain their acceptance of in the country was able to express its opinion their own profession was service by a memorandum indorsed on the duplicate notice. A copy of the absolutely silent, or if there were faint echoes of sound from different parts resolution passed was sent to each member of the society, and to all solicitors of the country, they were like those jarring sounds from distant points whici | practising in this city. redaced into a confused hum that which ought to be a definite and certain | The Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881.-This Act, which came sound. He would like to suggest—and he should be only too proud if the into operation on 1st of January, effects a radical change in the law and practice germ of such a movement were to arise from that meeting—that there should of conveyancing. Its aim is to simplify the law of property, and hy diminishing be an association of all members of the profession and the law, not confined to the length of deeds, to lessen the expense of dealing with land. Your compittes ing locality, not dedicated necessarily to change, but something in the nature hope'that the profession will give this important Act a fair trial, and make use of of those institutes-the Iron and Steel Institute, for example—which its provisions as far as practicable. Your committee at the same time feel that recognized as peculiarly belonging to themselves the preservation of the it is of the utmost importance in relation to this Act that the charges to be ioterests which they respectively represented. This was certainly not the allowed under the Solicitors' Remuneration Act should be framed on a just and time in which the lawyers should remain behind in the race of true progress. remunerative basis ; otherwise the Conveyancing Act cannot fail but to operate If they had this position they would not have upon the Statute-book a basty, injuriously to the profession. As soon as the General Order under the Solici. ill-considered jomble of words. Nothing could be a greater contrast to the tors' Remuneration Aot has been issued it may be desirable to have a special principles of common law than the mass of sometimes wholly unintelligible meeting of the society to consider both these Acts, and the practice to be words heaped together, of course by gentlemen of great intelligence in their adopted tbereunder by members of this society. line, but not lawyers, and who would decline to receive the assistance of Solicitors' Remuneration Act, 1881.–The question of remunerating solicitors lawyers, and who from time to time put reason, logic, and even grammar at in conveyancing business by an ad valorem scale has been before the profession at solate defiance. He challenged the learned judge (Mr. Motteram) to deny for some years, and various scales have been considered by this society. The the truth of bis words. If the influence of the law were in that way brought committee have now before them for consideration the draft order suggested to bear upon legislation we should hear less of the mode in which Acts of by the Council of the Incorporated Law Society to be adopted under the above Parliament were manufactured in the House of Commons, because, as Lord Act. Your president attended a meeting of the Associated Provincial Law Coke bad said, in that event it would be remitted to the learned to prepare Societies, held in London, on the 15th and 16th of December last, when the the statutes; the laity having pointed out the evil they suffered from, the wbole question was discussed, and the views of the country societies upon learned would find the remedy.

the proposed draft order were communicated to the Council of the Incorporated Law Society, and an amended draft proposed order more in accordance with such views has since been issued by the council of such society.

Report of the Legal Procedure Committee.-This very important report has

had the careful consideration of your committee, and they have communicated SOCIETIES.

their views thereon to the Council of the Incorporated Law Society, and also to

the Associated Provincial Law Societies. They cordially approve of the efforts LAW ASSOCIATION.

therein made to simplify the existing procedure, and which they think will,

if carefully worked ont, tend to expedite proceedings in astions. They believe At the usual monthly meeting of the directors, held at the hall of the

that in the large majority of actions pleadings may be dispensed with, but they Incorporated Law Society, Chancery.lane, on Thursday, 2nd inst., the think

think that where it is found necessary or desirable to have pleadings there following being present-viz., Mr. Bawtell (obairman), and Messrs. Des.

shall be power for å master to allow them without going to a judge as provided borough, jun., Hedger, Parkin, Sidney Smith, Styan, and A. B. Carpenter ht th

penter by the report. They also agree that the ordinary mode of trial sbould be by (secretary)-grants of £45 were made to the daughters of non-members, one

e a judge without a jury. If shorthand writers are to be appointed under suge new member was elected, and the ordinary general business was transacted.

gestion 13 they consider they should be public officers paid out of the public

funds, the suitors paying for such copies only of the shorthand writers' notes WORCESTER AND WORCESTERSHIRE LAW SOCIETY.

as they may require; they also consider that in actions where less than $200

is involved (suggestion 20) there should be no appeal without leave of a jadge, The annual meeting of this society was held at the Law Library, Pierpoint.

and no right to a special jury, but, in such cases, the present scale of costs street, Worcester, on Tuesday last. Present :-Mr. T. G. Hyde, president ;

ought not to be reduced, though a rule might be made that fees of only one Mr. W. P. Hughes, vice-president; Messrs. F. Parker, S. M. Beale, H. G.

counsel should be allowed upless the judge certified for two. A large comGoldingham, E, A. Davis, G. Clarke, G. W. Bentley, W. W. A. Tree, J. H.

mittee appointed at a meeting of the Incorporated Law Society on the 18th of Whalley, H. Goldingham, juo.; W. Allen, hon, treasurer; and F. Ronald

November last is still sittiog, and, when it has reported, the subject will be Jeffery, hop. secretary. The report of the committee having been adopted,

further considered by the Associated Provincial Law Societies. and the treasurer's accouuts passed, Mr. W. P. Hughes, after referring to the special services rendered by Mr. T. G. Hyde to the society as their president during the past year, and to the fact that he had been elected an extraordinary member of the Council of the Incorporated Law Society for the year

WOLVERHAMPTON LAW ASSOCIATION. ending November text, moved : “That in recognition of such services he be

The antual general meeting of this association was held at the Law Library, re-elected as their president for the ensuing year," and this proposition, on Tuesday afternoon. H. Owen. Esa. (Mayor of Wolverhampton), pre. having been seconded by Mr. S. M. Beale, was unanimously carried. Mr. W. | sided over a good attendance of members, amongst those present being Mr. P. Hughes was re-elected vice-président, and Mr. W. Allen hon. treasurer, H. H. Fowler, M.P. A proposal to concur with the Birmingham Law Society and Mr. F. R. Jeffery hon. secretary. The following gentlemen were elected

in adopting a uniform set of common form conditions of sale by public auction members of the committee, in addition to the ex-officio members : Messrs.

| was negatived, and the present conditions of the Wolverbampton Law AssociaS. M. Beale, F. Parker, E. A. Davies, T. Southall, and H. Goldingham, jun.

tion were directed to be referred to counsel for re-settlement with reference to A upanimous resolution was passed that it was desirable that the society should

the new Conveyancing Act. The annual report, read by the secretary (Mr. be incorporated, and other résolutions were agreed to for the purpose of carrying

Alfred Whitehouse), showed that the committee bad most carefully considered such incorporation into effect. The sum of £5 was also voted for the purpose

various Bills for the amendment of the law, particularly the Bankruptcy Bill, of providing two prizes to be competed for by members of the Worcester and

Conveyancing and Law of Property Bill, and made suggestions for the apend. Worcestershire Law Students' Society, under regulations to be framed by the

ment of the same, which were transmitted to the Incorporated Law Society committee. At this meeting Mr. Edward Novinson, of Malvern, solicitor, was

and others interested thereio. The treasurer's report was also read, and elected a member of the society; and the meeting concluded with the usual

sbowed a very satisfactory balance in favour of the funds of the society. On vole of thanks to the chair,

the proposition of the Mayor, seconded by Mr. H. Brevitt, Mr. S. Wells Page

was elected president for the ensuing year ; Mr. W. H. Colebourn was elected The following are extracts from the report of the committee:

vice-president, and Mesers, Alfred Whitehouse and Henry Stanley, jun., were The present number of members is fifty-nine as against sixty last year. respectively re-elected secretary and treasurer. Messrs. T. Walker, W. A.

Soliciting proofs and proxies in bankruptcy. The committee's attention Green, T. Dallow, and R. W. Rutter retired from the committee pursuant to having been drawn to a practice adopted by some members of the profession rule 18, and Mesers. Walker and Greea being eligible for re-election, were, of soliciting proofs and proxies in bankruptcy proceedings, a resolution was together with Mr. H. O. Owen (the retiring president), and Mr. F. T. passed by the committee that such å practice was contrary to professional | Langley, elected to fill the vacancies on the committee. The oustomary cometiquette, and was to be deprecated.

plimentary votes of thanks having been passed to the officers for the past year, London agents' charger. - The Liverpool Incorporated Law Society having | the proceedings terminated. The annual dinner took place at the Star and drawn attention to the rictios of many London agents charging in certain Garter Hotel in the evening

LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL.

Vanderpump, Barry, Trotter, and Kirk took part. At the conclusion of the debate both questions were put to the meeting, the former being decided in the negative, the latter in the affirmative.

[ocr errors]

MIDDLE TEMPLE.

UNITED LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. The following list of scholarships for Hilary Examination, 1882, has just been issued : - Common and Criminal Law-'William Clark (a). 'first-class At a meeting held at Clement’s-inn on Wednesday, January 11, Mr. Kaips. scholarship of 50 guineas ; Robert Jolin Newell (b), second-class scholarship

Jackson in the chair, Mr. Richardson moved “That the law of distress for of 20 guineas. Real and Personal Property-Robert E. Partridge (a), first

rent should be abolished.” The opener was supported by Mr. Spence and class scholarship of 50 guineas. Equity-R. D. Setbna (a), first-class

opposed by Messrs. Edlio, Shirley, and Jenks. Mr. Richardson having scholarship of 50 guineas ; George M. Ballon (b), second-class scholarship of

replied, the chairman sommed up, and, upon being put to the meeting, the 20 goineas. International and Constitutional Law-Robert Francis Harrison

motion was lost by five votes. (a), first-class scholarship of 50 gaineas; Valentine J. Hussey-Walsh (b),

At a meeting held at Clement's-ion Hall, on Wednesday, the 25th of second-class scholarsbip of 20 guineas.

January, Mr. Francis 0. Edlin in the chair, Mr. C. Kaing-Jackson moved, “ That the case of the persons imprisoned for bribery is a fitting one for the

exercise of her Majesty's clemency." The opener was supported by Messrs CALLS TO THE BAR.

Maclaren and Tillotson, and opposed by Messrs. W. C. Owen and Rundle. The undermentioned gentlemen were last week called to the bar :

Levey. Mr. Kains-Jackson having replied, the chairman summed up, and INNER TEMPLE.—Charles Coombe Tennant, B.A., Oxford ; Henry Coroiab,

the motion opon being put to the meeting was declared carried. Associate of King's College, London; Herman John Falk, M.A., Oxford ;

At the Law Institution on Monday, the 30th of January, Mr. C. Parsons Arthur Evans, B.A., Cambridge; Henry Milly Beevor, B.A., LL.B., Cam

opened the moot, which was as follows:-" Are the persons wbo go to a bridge; Charles Henry Cook, B.A., Cambridge : Alfred Standring.' B.A., prize fight to see tbe combatanis strike each other, and who are present wben LLB., Cambridge : Albert Joel Ellis. B.A. Oxford: Charles Frederick Gose the combatants so strike esch other, guilty of an assault? Mr. Parsons conB.A., Cambridge; Malcolm William Searle, B.A., LL.B., Cambridge ; Henry

tended that, in the absence of evidence of actual incitement, the question Frederick Amedroz, London ; Victor Beare Fitz-Gibbon, B.A., Dublin ;

should be answered in the negative, and in this contention he was supported Thomas Henry Russell, LL.B., Cambridge; Walter Cranley Ryde, B.A.,

by Mr. Barham and opposed by Messrs. Baker and Colyer. Mr. Parsons having Oxlord ; Thomas Alexander Martin, B. A., Oxford; William John Lee (holder replied, the obairman summed up, and upon the vore the meeting was equally of a Pupil Scholarship in Equity awarded by the Inner Temple, July, 1881),

| divided. The chairman gave bis casting vote against Mr. Parsons. B.A., Cambridge; Samuel Frederick Smithson, Cambridge ; Arthur Watkin

The usual weekly meeting of this society was held on Wednesday, the 1st Williams Wynn, B.A., Oxford ; Henry Francis Herbert Thompson, B.A.,

inst., at Clement's-inn Hall, Mr. L'A. B. Collyer in the chair, when Mr. Cambridge; William Henry Cross, B A., Oxford ; William Radeliffe, Oxford

H. H. Richardson moved, " That the exigencies of parliamentary debate the Hon. John William Mansfield, B.A., Cambridge ; William Fielden Craies,

require the institution of the clôture." Mr. Mott Whitehouse seconded the M.A., Oxford; George Latham Davis, B.A., Cambridge; Henry Edmund

motion, which was supported by Messrs. Joel, Parker, Parsons, and Bartram, Simondo, B.A., LL.B., Cambridge ; Henry Lawregee Prior, BA., Oxford;

and opposed by Messrs. Broun, Rosher, Kaing-Jaokson, Dennis, and Tillotson. Arthur Brooke Lloyd, B.A., Oxford; William James Noble, M.A., Oxford ;

| Tbe cbairman summed up and put the question to the meeting, wben the George Elliott; George St. John Mildmay, B.A., Cambridge; Jobn Forrester

motion was lost by a majority of tour. The house adjourned at 10.15 p.m. M'Ewen, B.A., Cambridge; Henry Herbert Browell, B.A., Cambridge ; Herbert Burgess Barrett, Cambridge; and John Overend Evans, Esqs.

BIRMINGHAM LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.
MIDDLE TEMPLE.- Archibald Christie ; Charles White Burroughs, Trinity
College, Dublin, LL.D. ; Charles William Ímrie; Dolatray Surbhai Desai, Lon-

The annual meeting and dinner took place on Tuesday evening at the Grand don University, LL.B.; David Fowler Burton; Alfred Victor Blumberg, St.

Hotel, under the presidency of Sir Hardioge S. Giffard, Q.O., M.P. The John's College, Oxford, B.A. ; William Bold Hurry, Downing College, Cambridge,

vice-chair was occupied by Mr. Edwin Parry, registrar of the Birmingham B.A. ; Charles Simon Davson, Trinity Hall, Cambridge, B.A., LL.B. : John

County Court. The toast of “ The Queen and the Royal Family' hiving Litbiby, University of London; James George Frazer, M.A., and Fellow,

been proposed by the president, the annual report of the committee was res d Trinity College, Cambridge; Charles Francis Barrow; Rnger William

by the hon. secretary. It showed that during the year 3 honorary me nbers Wallace, University of London; George Cbarles Frames, B.A., LL.B.,

had joined the society and 19 had ceased to be meinbers. The total number Christ's College, Cambridge, and B.Sc., University of London, Esqs., and

of bonorary members was 220, against 227 at the close of last year. ThirtyMajor Richard Thomas Higgins.

three new ordinary members had been added to the society during tbe year, 2 LINCOLN'S-INN.-Walter Ivimey Cook, University of London ; Robert

had been called to the bar, 21 were admitted solicitors, thus becoming bonorary Stewart Menzies, B.A., Oxford ; Herbert Henry Child, B.A., Cambridge ;

members, while 13 had ceased to be members of the society. The number of Thomas Rees Jones, B.A., Cambridge; George William Tallents, R.A.,

ordinary members was now 82, as against 81 last year, 87 in 1879, 84 in 1878. Oxford ; William Robert Sheldon, B.A., Oxford; Arthur Allen Wickeds,

The total number of the members of the society was 302- viz., 15 barristers Balliol College, Oxford ; Arthur Moss Lawrence, University of London ;

and 205 solicitors, and 82 bar students and articled clerks. After referriog to Samuel Moore, B.A., Cambridge; Ho Kai (Lincoln's-inn Scholarship in

the events of the year, the committee stated that they bad reason to believe Equity, 1881), of Hongkong, China (M.B., C.M., Aberdeen); and John

the scheme for the appointment of a reader and lecturer to hold classes in Wanklyn M'Connel, M.A., Cambridge, Esqs.

Birmingham for the benefit of the students of the town and neighbourbood GRAY'S-INN.-Heory Albert Alcazar, and Henry Loder Beddy, Esqs.

would soon be in active operation. The subject of the Union prize for 1880, offered annually by the United Law Students' Society in London for com.

petition by members of the law students' societies throughout the country, LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY.

was “The Marriage Laws of England and Scotland, and what steps, if any, Taesday, January 17.-Mr. Kirk in the chair.-Mr. T. T. Trotter was

should be taken to assimilate them.” The first prize, of £5 58., was awarded

to Mr. F. W. Steer, a member of the Birmingham Society. The subject of elected a member. The following question was appointed for debate:

| the prize essay of the society awarded annually for the past session, apon some “S., a Portoguese woman by birth and domiciled in Portugal, marries in

legal or jurisprudence subject, was “ The Law of Master and Servant," and England B., also a Portuguese by birth, but at the time of the marriage

30 the first prize was awarded to Mr. E. C. Rogers. domiciled in England. S. and B. are first cousins, and by the law of

On the motion of the Pre:ident, seconded by Mr. Deakin, the report and Portogal first consirs are, except by dispensation from the Pope, incapable

capable statement of accounts were adopted. of contracting marriage. Is the marriage of S. and B. valid by the law of

The President proposed, “ The Birmingham Law Students' Society,” Mr. England ?” (Sottomayor, otherwise De Barros, v. De Barros, L. R. 2 P. D.

G. Huggins responded, and stated that the general opinion was that the 81, 3 P. D. 1, 5 P. D. 94). The debate was opened in the affirmative by

society was in a most flourishing state. “ The Bench and Bar" was pro. Mr. J. W. Mills, and, after some discussion, the question was put to the

posed by Mr. E. 0. Smith, and acknowledged by Mr. Motteram, Q.C., and meeting and decided in the affirmative by a majority of six votes.

Mr. Hugo Young. "The Birmingham Law Society" was given by Mr. E. Tuesday, January 24.--Mr. W. Bartlett in the obair.-Mr. F. de B.

Parry, and replied to by Mr. H. Lakin Smith. "The Health of the Presi. Strickland was elected a member. The debate appointed to take place was

dent," proposed by Mr. H. M. Barrows, terminated the proceedings. upon the question, “Has the Irisb polioy of the Government been satis. factory?""Mr. W. A. Bilney opened the discussion in the affirmative, and was supported by Messrs. Radford, Stevenson, Rbys, and Payne. The

MANCHESTER LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY. negative view was sopported by Messrs. Hutton, O. E. Barry, Striok land, The sixth meeting of the session of this society was held at the Law Neale, and Pope. On a division the question was decided in the negative Library, Cross-street, on Tuesday week, at ball-past six-o'clock, when the by a majority of three votes. There were thirty-four members present. chair was takea by Mr. James Cottingham, B.A., barrister-at-law, the

Tuesday, January 31.—Mr. F. J. Green in the chair.-It was announced that question for discussion being as follows :-“Was the expulsion of Mr. at the next meeting, to be held on the 7th of February, the society would pro Bradlaugh from the House of Commons justifiable ?" The affirmative was ceed to elect a secretary in the place of Mr. Napier, who resigns. The subject opened by Mr. Brooks, and he was supported by the hon. sec. and Messrs. appointed for debate was the following:-“ A. has exclusive use of Read and Rowland. The negative was argued by Mr. Abell, who was a' room in a house for which he pays a weekly rent amount. followed by Messrs. Rayner, Winser, Betty, and Rycroft. The chairman ing to less than £10 & year. The landlord lives on the premises summed up the arguments, and the question was ultimately decided in the but renders no service. B. occupies a room in a bonge under negative by a majority of seven. A vote of thanks to the chairman closed similar circumstances, except tbat the landlord does not reside in the the proceedings. bouse. (1) Is A. entitled to a parliamentary vote as a householder ? (2) Is C. 80 entitled ?" (Bradley v. \Bayliss ; Morfee v. Novis; Kirby v. Biffen ; 30 & 31 Vict. c. 102, ss. 3, 4, 7, 61, 32 & 33 Vict. c.14, ss. 3, 4, 19; 41 & 42 Vict, c. 26, 89. 5, 14.) Mr. Pope opened the discussion in the affirmative and The number of "fair rept" applications by Irish tenants under the Land M, Sargent in the negative, In the debate which followed Messra, Dees, | Act sent in up to Wednesday is 68,100,

to which domiciled Scotcbmen were subject, and they had a recent case in the

Court of Session, showing how the order was made to operate. It was a question OBITUARY.

how best they might remedy the grievance, and probably it would be by

representation to the Lord Chancellor, as the making of those orders was MR. JOHN MARRIOTT DAVENPORT.

subject to the cognizance of the English judges. There was a suggestion to

deal with the question by a Bill, but it did not seem suoh a hopeful way of Mr. Jobn Marriott Davenport, solicitor and notary, clerk of the peace for

getting the matter put right as the proposal to get the matter rescinded or Oxfordshire, died at Oxford on the 31st ult., after a long illness. Mr. Daven

amended. The real gravamen of the complaint was that the order had been port was born in 1809. He was admitted a solicitor in 1830, and had

used as a means of getting at individual defendants resident in Scotland when practised for over half-a-century at Oxford, having a large number of clients

there was no one else concerned in the case, and nothing should prevent the among the gentry and clergy in the dist-ict. He was a notary public and a

trial being in Scotland. perpetual commissioner for Oxfordshire and Berkshire, and be bad held several

A deputation from the legal bodies on the same subject was received, and important public appointments. HA bai been for many years clerk of the

the Lord Advocate expressed himself to the same effect as he did to the first

the peace and clerk to the lieutenancy for Oxfordsbire, and since the passing of Court of Probate Act be bad been registrar of the Oxford District Probate

deputation. Registry of the High Court of Justice. He was registrar of the diocese of Oxford, and secretary to several successive bishops of Oxford, but about three years ago he was succeeded in the latter office by his son, Mr. Thomas Marriott

LEGAL APPOINTMENTS. Davenport, M.A., of Pembroke College, Oxford, who was admitted a solicitor in 1867. Mr. Davenport was for many yeads in succession appointed under. aberiff of Oxfordsbire, and he was one of the proctors in the Vice-Chancellor's

Mr.HENRY HALLIFAX WELLS, solicitor, of 8, Paternoster-row, and Barnet, court. His death has caused universal regret at Oxford.

bas been appointed Solicitor to the Barnet Licensed Victuallers' Protection Association. Mr. Wells was admitted a solicitor in 1871.

Mr. John PAYTER, solicitor, of Kington and New Radnor, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Sapreme Court of

Jadicatore. UNQUALIFIED PRACTITIONERS.

Mr. WILLIAM ST. JAMES WHEELHOUSE, Q.C., has been eleoted Treasurer At the Birmingham Police Court on Tuesday, before Mr. Kynnersley of the Society of Gray's-inn for the current year. (stipendiary), and Mr. J. D. Goodman, Frederick Charles Cooke, of Broad v ocaco

Mr. GEORGE PETER MARTIN, barrister, has been appointed Secretary to street, Bristol (formerly a solicitor's clerk at Monmouth), was summoned. under the Solicitors Act, 1874, for wilfully pretending to be a solicitor on the

the Committee nominated by the Admiralty to inquire further into the cause 24th of August last. Mr. G. Lee (of the firm of Horton, Lee, & Lee) prose

of the loss of the Doterel. Mr. Martin was called to the bar at the Middle cuted on behalf of the Incorporated Law Society. Mr. Botcher (deputy.

Temple in Hilary Term, 1872. He is depaty judge advocate of the Fleet registrar of the county court) was in attendance to give evidence as to the

at Portsmoutb. procedure of the court. In reply to Mr. Hebbert (the magistrates' clerk), Mr. Thomas ATKINSON, solicitor (of the firm of Shirley, Atkinson, & defendant said he had only once represented himself as a solicitor. Mr. Leo Donner), of Doncaster and Soarborongb, bas been elected Coroner for the said that prisoner was cbarged under section 12 of the Solicitors Act, which Borough of Dcnoaster, in succession to his partner, the late Mr. Arthur stated that, “any person who wilfully and falsely pretends to be, or takes or James Shirley. Mr. Atkinson was admitted a solicitor in 1857. His senior uses any name, title, addition, or description, implying that he is duly qualified partner, Mr. William Edward Shirley, is town clerk of Doncaster, and to act as an attorney or solicitor, or that he is recognized by law as so qualified, registrar of the Doncaster County Court. shall be guilty of an offence under this Act, and be liable to a penalty not exceeding ibe sum of £10 for each such offence. Mr. Lee, continuing, said

Mr. BASIL FIELD, solicitor (of the firm of Field, Roscoe, Francis, &

Osbaldestou), of 36, Lincoln's-inn-fielde, has been appointed Honorary that this was one of the first cases which had occurred in the

Solicitor to the Parkes Museum. Mr. Field is the son of the late Mr. district, but last year a man was summoned for a similar offence at the Guildhall, London, and found guilty. The facts of this case were

Edwin Wilkins Field, solicitor. He is a B.A. of the University of London,

and he was admitted a solicitor in 1860. rather peculiar. The defendant, who had formerly been a solicitor's clerk at Monmouth, sent instructions in August last to the registrar of the Birmiogham

Mr. FIELDING CLARKE, barrister, bas been appointed Attorney-General County Court against a debtor ip Birmingham, he (defendant) representing for tbe Colony of Fiji. Mr. Clarke is an LL.B, of the University of London. himself to be a solicitor and the plaintiff's lawyer. On summonses of this He was called to the bar at the Middle Temple in May, 1876, and has kind a fee of ten shillings is allowed to the solicitor, and the debtor was praotised on the North-Eastern Circuit, and at the West Riding, Leeds, and charged with it by the court ; but before the summons was heard the imposi. Sheffield Sessions. tion was detected and the case dismissed. Offences of a similar nature

Mr. EDWIN WOOD, solicitor (of the firm of Blaobford, Riobes, Kilsby, & occurred all over England, but they were difficult to discover. Since the iesue of the magistrates' summons the defendant bad written to him, stating | administer Oathe in the Supreme Court of Jadioatare.

| Wood), of 21, College-bill, London, has been appointed a Commissioner to

w that he was sorry for what had taken place, but the plaintiff in the action was an old friend of bis, and it had only been done in a friendly way. The stipendiary remarked that the society was quite right in instituting the proceed

DISSOLUTION OF PARTNERSHIP. ings. However, as they only wished publicity given to them, and as defendant had pleaded Guilty, he should only order him to pay a fine of £2 and costs,

Samuel NEWMAN and CHARLES WILLIAM Powell, solioitors (Powell, although the full penalty of $10 might have been enforced

Now man, & Powell), Newport Pagoell. Jan. 1. On the 26th ult., before the Queen's Bench Division sitting in Banc, Mr.

[Gazette, Jan. 31, 1882.] W. Murray, on behalf of the Incorporated Law Society, moved for a rule to show cause why a writ of attachment should not issue against Samuel Symons, an accountant, for a contempt of court. The offence alleged was having acted as a solicitor, or as a solicitor sued out a writ out of the High Court in the case of Dockings v. Vickary without being doly qualified to act

COMPANIES. in that tehalf, contrary to the provisions of 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73, s. 2, and 23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, 8. 26. The learned counsel referred to a similar case of In

WINDING-UP NOTICES. re Hunt, decided by Mr. Justice Grove and Mr. Baron Huddleston,

Joint Stock COMPANIBB.
Their lordships granted a rule.

LIMITED IN CHANCERY.
CHERAMBADI (WYNAAD) DISTRICT GOLD MINING COMPANY, LIMITED.--Petition for

winding up, presented Jan 25, directed to be heard before Chitty, J, on Feb 4. Beall
and Co, Queen Victoria st, solicitors for the petitioner

FOREIGN PROVISION, WINE AND SPIRIT TRADING AssociatION, LIMITED,-Kay, J, has SCOTTISH DEFENDANTS IN ENGLISH fixed Feb 6, at 11, at chambers of Chitty, J, for the appointment of an official

liquidator COURTS.

LA CONCEPCION GOLD MINING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Kay, J, has fixed Saturday, Feb

4, at 12, at chambers of Chitty, J, for the appointment of an official liquidator On Tuesday four deputations waited on Lord Rosebery and the Lord Advocate

SOUTI ESSEX EQUITABLE INVESTMENT AND ADVANCE COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order at Edinburgh. The first deputation consisted of representatives from the made by Kay, J., dated Jan 18, it was ordered that the voluntary winding up of the Edinburgh Town Council, the governors of the Merchant Company, and the

company be continued. Storey and Cowland, Theobald's rd, Gray's inn, agents for directors of the Chamber of Commerce and Trade Protection Society, and had

Crick and Freeman, Maldon

SOUTH GARSTON DOCK AND WAREHOUSE COMPANY, LIMITED.--Petition for winding up, reference to the assumed jurisdiction of English courts over domiciled Scotch presented Jan 26, directed to be heard before Chitty, J. on Feb 4. Sharpo and Co, fpen, Lord Provost Sir Thomas Boyd introduced the deputation. He re New ct, Carey st, agents for Harvey and Co, solicitors for the petitioner marked that the practice seemed to be in direct violation of the Act confirming

UPLEES BRICKFIELDS COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order made by Kay, J, dated Jan 19,

it was ordered that the company be wound up. Longcroft and Myers, Olement's inn, the Treaty of Union, and said it inflicted hardships on the people of Scotland.

Strand, solicitors for the petitioner Treasurer Harrison said that the amount of costs was very muoh greater when

[Gazette, Jan. 27.] an action was taken to England. Other members of the deputations having FOREIGN PROVISION, WINE AND SPIRIT TRADING Association, LIMITED.-By an order expressed their views,

made by Kay, J, dated Jan 19, it was ordered that the association be wound up. The Lord Advocate said he wished to assure the deputation that they

MacColla, Cheapside, solicitor for the petitioner

GERMAN DATE COFFEE COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for windir were quite satisfied that here there was a genuine Scotch grievance. directed to be heard before Chitty, J, on Feb 11. Longcroft and Myers, Clement's inn, It was not the intention of the framers of the order of 1875, or the Strand, solicitors for the petitioners amecded order, that it should be worked in the way in which it was La ConcepcION GOLD MINING COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order made by Kay, J, done. His own experience boro out what had been said of the hardships | bure

dated Jan 19, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Montagu, Bucklers.

ITED.-Petition for winding up, presented Jan 30.

« PreviousContinue »