Page images
PDF
EPUB

5d.

decrease in the cost of the latter. The average cost of each case tried offences in convict prisons was in 82 cases corporal, in 161 by means of shows a decrease of 1s. 8d., and, in summary proceed ings, a decrease of punishment cells, in 10,703 dietary, and in 7,734 by loss of class or

privilege. The staff establishment of convict prisons consisted of 1,741 GOVERNMENT PROSECUTIONS.

persons, of whom 27 were governors or deputy-governors or superintend. There were 238 Mint cases prosecuted and concluded in 1880, and the

ents, 25 ministers of religion, 69 schoolmasters, Scripture readers, and total cost paid by the Treasury in these cases was £1,678 138. 5d.

schoolmistresses, 21 medical officers, 11 stewards, 81 clerks, &c., and Criminal cases other than Mint cases prosecuted by the Solicitor to the 1,507 subordinate officers, servants, and guards. The total cost of conTreasury were 270, and the costs incurred in respect of these were vict prisons amounted to £351,129 198. 4d., consisting of £176,342 16s. 6d. £15,997 188. In 1879 the Mint cases numbered 210, of which the cost

for staff, £148,102 9s. id. for maintenance of convicts, and was £1,277 14s. 1d., and the other prosecutions wero 173, costing

$26,684 139. 9d. for incidentals, and showing an average annual cost $10,102 98.

per prisoner of £33 11s. 11d. The total gross expenditure shows & GOVERNMENT LOCAL PRISONS.

decrease of £5,997 Os. 20. as compared with the previous year, but in the

average cost per convict there is an increase of 78. 8d. Deducting the The returns for Government local prisons are for the year ending the

value of labour, exclusive of employment in the service of the prisons31st of March, 1881. During that year there were 67 such prisons, in

viz., 6202,552 4s. 100.--and of the incidental receipts, the net cost of the previous year 68, and in the year ending the 31st of March, 1879, the

convict prisons was $147,045 14s., and the average cost per prisoner original number of 113 prisons was reduced by the closing of 45. During the year covered by this return, 179,069 prisoners were com

$14 18. 4d. mitted, being a decrease of 13,166 from the number of the previons

REFORMATORY SCHOOLS. year. Out of the number committed in 1881 it appears that 24,737 had The number of reformatory schools in England and Wales in 1879-80 been once previously committed, 11,272 twice, 6,839 thrice, 4,602 four was 53, including three ships. There were 1,387 offenders committed to times, 3,163 five times, 4,352 six or seven times, 3,676 eight, nine, or ten

these schools during the year, being an increase of 137 on the number of times, and 10,421 more than ten times, making a total of 69,062 out of the previous year. In addition to those committed during the year, and 179,069 prisoners committed to prison in 1881 who had been previously

4,838 who were in reformatories at the commencement of the year, 35 committed. Excluding debtors and naval and military prisoners, the ages were received from other schools, 10 from prison, 7 were re-admitted of 166,263 of these prisoners are given as follows:-Under 12 years, after absconding in a previous year, and 81 returned from license or 528; 12 years and under 16, 5,051 ; 16 and under 21, 28,196 ; 21 and leave of absence, making a total of 6,358. Of this number 157 were disunder 30, 53,620; 30 and under 40, 37,984; 40 and under 50, 22,736; charged by order of the Secretary of State, 462 were discharged on com. 50 and under 60, 10,973; 60 and above, 6,831 ; unascertained, 344. The pletion of their sentence, 839 were permitted out on license or leave of number of those under 12 years of age who were committed has decreased absence or in service, 25 absconded and were not re-takep, 21 were from 1,084 in 1875 to 528 in 1881, and the total of those under 16 from committed to prison for refractory conduct, 36 were removed to other 7,212 in 1875 to 5,579 in 1881. Of the 166,263 prisoners before men schools, and 24 died, making a total of 1,564, and leaving 4,794 in the tioned, 55,793 conld neither read nor write, 104.503 could read or read schools at the end of the year. Of the 1,387 committed to reformatory and write imperfectly, 5,331 could read and write well, 225 had received schools during the year, 420 had been previously committed once, 134 superior instruction, and as to 411 their state of education was not ascer twice, 49 thrice, 10 four times, 6 five times, and 3 six or seven times, tained. Among the same prisoners it appears that there were 16,085 who while 765 had not been previously committed. Out of the same 1,381, were of no occupation, 126,920 were domestic servants, labourers, factory it appears that 519 could neither read nor write, 746 could read or read workers, and mechanics, and 656 in professional employments. At the and write imperfectly, 121. could read and write well, and not one is beginning of the year the local prisons contained (including debtors and classed under the heading “superior instruction.” The total amount naval and military offenders) 18,979 prisoners ; during the year 179,060 payable by the Treasury on account of reformatory schools was were committed and 6,230 were removed between several prisons ; of this $72,828 11s. 4d., being less than in the previous year by £216 4s. 10d., number it appears that 186,949 were removed and that 17,329 remained

and the amount recovered from parents was $6,015 39. 6d., being a at the end of the year, being a decrease of 1,650 from those at its decrease of £291 4s. 10d. commencement. The 186,949 prisoners removed during the year were disposed of as follows:-1,734 were sent to Government prisons, 6,336

MIDDLESEX INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL. to county and borough prisons, 1,290 to reformatory schools, 135 to There were 92 commitments to Feltham in the year ending 29th of lunatic asylums, 309 were discharged on pardon or commutation of their September, 1880, as against 47 in the previous year. The number in the sentence, 1 on license, and 175,269 on termination of sentence; 1,680 school at the commencement of the year was 145, which, being added to were bailed, 2 escaped, 18 committed suicide, 163 died, and 12 were the 92 committed, and 13 returned from license, gives 250 as the total executed. The greatest number of prisoners at any one time occupying number under detention during the year, as against 192 in 1879. Of the 25,124 separate cells in local prisons was 22,081, and the highest this number 19 were discharged by order of the Secretary of State, 24 on daily average 18,027. Those under sentence of hard labour during the completion of their term, 13 were permitted out on license, and 8 year numbered 125,316, being a decrease from the previous year of absconded and were not re-taken, leaving 186 under detention at the end 8,883. During the year there were 163 deaths from natural causes in of the year. The average cost per head was $26 Os. 6d., as against Government local prisons, and there were also 148,392 cases of sickness, £24 38. 78. in 1879. The amount recovered from parents was of which 143,969 were of a slight nature; there were, besides this, 153 cases $216 15s. 6d. of insanity. Prison punishments were inflicted in 43,312 cases, of which

INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS. 173 were corporal, 2,407 by means of punishment cells, 21,846 as regards diet, and 18,886 by loss of stage or privilege. There is a decrease in the

There are returns from 96 industrial schools, in which 10,096 were number of prison punishments of 6,372. The prison officers were 2,127

under detention at the commencement of the year, 2,988 were comin number, comprising 81 governors and deputy-governors, 93 chaplains

mitted during the year, 10 were re-admitted after absconding, 57 were and assistant chaplains, 72 surgeons and assistant surgeons, 218 clerks

received from reformatories or other industrial schools, and 237 returned and schoolmasters and mistresses, 53 matrons, 1,304 warders, and 306

from license or leave of absence. This makes a total of 13,388 children other sub.officers. These numbers give one officer to 8:4 of the daily

in these schools during the year, who were disposed of as follows:-91 average number of prisoners. The costs of Government local prisons

were removed to other schools, 1,709 were discharged, 69 died, 13 consist of $223,316 for the staff, £152,229 maintenance of prisoners, and

absconded and were not re-taken, and 1,040 were let out on license or other expenses £34,973; to these three principal items should be added,

leave of absence, and 10,466 remained in the schools at the end of the $5,636 6s. 1d. for rates, &c., and $5,522 for books and stationery, making

year. The total cost was $199,575, as against £188,533 in the previous up a total of $421,686. This item shows a decrease, as compared with

year, and the amount received from parents was $10,853, as against the previous year, of £9,299, and, as compared with 1867, of 679,662.

$11,442 in 1879. The average cost of each prisoner was £22 158. 5d. Prisoners' labour,

CRIMINAL LUNATICS. taken on an estimate, and sale of old stores, are credited at the sum of In the several asylums, hospitals, and licensed houses there were, £149,943; in the previous year the amount was £151,931.

during the year ending the 29th of September, 1880, 848 criminal

lunatics, 532 of whom were at Broadmoor. At the commencement of the CONVICT PRISONS.

year there were 674 under detention, 168 were committed during the There are 12 convict prisons which, at the commencement of the year, 5 were received from other asylums, and I was recaptured after year, contained 10,378 convicts, and during the year 1,639 were received escape. Of the total number during the year, it appears that 32 died, from local prisons, making in all 12,017, besides 198 received under one escaped, 24 were discharged on becoming sane, 11 were removed revoked licenses. Of this number it appears that 7 were removed to sane for trial or punishment, 7 were removed to other asylums, and 102 local prisons, 26 to lunatic asylums, 1,850 were discharged, 246 on were discharged on the expiration of their term of punishment, having expiration of their sentence, 1,565 on license, 7 on medical grounds, and ceased to be criminal lunatics, leaving 671 under detention at the end of 32 on remission or commutation of their sentence, 136 died, 4 committed the year. The average cost of the lunatics per head at Broadmoor was. suicide, and 4 escaped, making a total of 2,026 disposed of during the £47 158. 3d., but at the 47 county asylums only $26 28. 5d. The total year, and there remained in prison at the end of the year 10,268 convicts. cost was £29,815, of which $2,110 was contributed by county rates, The total number of infirmary cases in convict prisons during the year £459 by borough rates or funds, £9,212 by union or parish rates, was 6,506 ; there were also 281 cases of insanity, Punishment for prison | £16,408 from public revenues, and $1,626 from private sources,

CORRESPONDENCE.

CASES OF LAST WEEK.

TRIAL BY JURY.

PRACTICE-INDORSEMENT ON WRIT-CLAIM FOR INJONCTION-RULES OF

COURT, 1875, APPENDIX A., PART 2, FORM No. 75.--In a case of In re [To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.]

Myers' Patent, before the Court of Appeal on the 5th iost., a question Sir, -Having read with much interest your remarks on the proposed | incidentally arose as to the forms of indorsements of writs given in part 2 curtailment of the jury system in civil causes, I am tempted to suggest of appendix A. to the Role

of appendix A. to the Rales of Court scheduled to the Judicature Act, 1875. that there is one important branch of the administration of our law

A writ in an aotion was indorsed with a claim for (1) rescission of a speoi. in which trial by jury ought to be introduced-I mean in summary

fied indentare ; (2) damages ; (3) repayment by the defendant of moneys convictions by magistrates.

paid to him ander the indentore; (4) an ipjanotion ; (5) & receiver ; The growth of magisterial jurisdiction has been very great, if not

(6) accounts and inquiries ; (7) farther or other relief. JESSEL, M.R., said alarming. That jurisdiction is anomalous and contrary to all our

that the indorsement ought to have stated for what purpose the injanction English notions that a man is entitled in a criminal case to be tried by

was claimed. It was orged that the olaim for an injanotion simpliciter was

by his peers. Everyone with the slightest practical knowledge is aware that

in accordance with the form No. 75 given in part 2 of appendix A., which

is “Add to indorsement, and for an injonotion." In the form, as given in & police constable is generally a witness in cases before the justices. Mr. Wilson's book, the word “injanotion " is followed by a full stop. Yet the police are the eyes, ears, nose, and feelers of the magistracy. JESSEL, M.R., said that the fall stop is not in the Act, and it must bave I have often seen one policeman believed by magistrates in preference been ingerted by the printer. The intention clearly was that the nature to the oaths of several respectable but unliveried citizens.

of the injanotion olaimed should be stated on the writ, though it was a Between magistrates and culprits, the latter should be entitled to very common mistake to ask merely for an injanotion.-SOLICITORS, Field, demand the verdict of a jury. This would perhaps not be needful in all Roscoe, & Co.; Rowley, Page, & Rowley. cases; but there are many cases in which the decisions of justices involve far greater consequences than many cases triable at quarter sessions.

The county courts are presided over by trained judges; yet there, in SALE BY ORDER OF COURT-INVALID ORDER-PROTECTION OF PURCHASER cases over £5, the parties are entitled to a jury.

-CONVEYANCING AND LAW OF PROPERTY Act, 1881, s. 70-SETTLED Why should there not be an optional jury, similar to that in use in

ESTATES ACT, 1877, ss. 25-28, 40-ORDERS OF 1878, R. 24.-In a case of the county courts, in a great number of the cases now punishable by

In re Hall Daro's Contract, before the Court of Appeal on summary conviction ?

F. STROUD.

the 5th inst., an important question arose as to the effect of Cheltenham, April 5.

section 70 of the Conveyancing Act of 1881, which provides that (1) “ 40 order of the court under any statutory or other jurisdiction shall not, as against a purchaser, be invalidated on the ground of want of jurisdiction or of

want of any concurrence, consent, notice, or service, whether the purchaser THE CONDUIT MEAD ESTATE.

has notice of any such want or not;” (2) “this section shall have effect with

respect to any lease, sale, or other act under the authority of the court, and [To the Editor of the Solicitors' Journal.]

purporting to be in pursuance of the Settled Estates Act, 1877, notwithstand. Sir,-It may interest your readers to be informed with reference to the

ing the exception in section 40 of that Act, or to be in pursuance of any leases on this estate, granted by the Corporation of London, which are renew.

former Act repealed by that Act, notwithstanding any exception in such able every fourteen years, provided sixty days' notice be given to the City

former Act." And section 25 of the Settled Estates Act, 1877, provides that Lands Committee, that the Court of Common Council, in June, 1866, passed

“ when an infant is tenant in tail under the settlement, it shall be lawful for the

court, if it shall think fit, to dispense with the concurrence or consent of the & resolution that in all cases of omission to apply in proper time for renewal

person, if only one, or all or any of the persons if more than one, entitled, whether which should thenceforward be brought before the court, new leases beneficially or otherwise, to any estate or interest subsequent to the estate should only be granted for absolute fixed terms, to be approved by the tail of such infant." Section 26 requires that “where, on an application uuder court, not exceeding in any case the term of ninety years, and that no the Act, the concurrence or consent of any such person as aforesaid shall not covenant for renewal ehould be inserted therein. On December 8 last, I have been obtained, notice shall be given to such person." Section 27 enables brought forward a motion in the court to rescind this resolution, on the the court to dispense with notice in certain cases, and section 28 gives the grounds, first, that no advantage should be taken by a great cor

court a general power of dispensing with consent and concurrence. Section poration of accident or oversight: and, secondly, that in particular it | 40 provides that "after the completion of any lease or sale or other act ander should not be done in the cases then before the court-(a) because no

the authority of the court, and purporting to be in pursuance of this Act, tbe notice had been given by the comptroller to the lessees generally of the

same shall not be invalidated on the ground that the court was not hereby resolution of June, 1866; and (6) because no warning of the obligation

empowered to authorize the same, except that no such lease, sale, or other

act shall have any effect against such person as hereio mentioned whose conto give notice had been given by the comptroller to the particular lessees in

currence or consent ought to be obtained, or who ought to be served with default. This motion to rescind was negatived, but during the present year a

notice, or in respect of whom an order dispensiog with such service ought to resolution has been carried on the motion of Mr. De Keyser, seconded by my be obtained in the case where such concurrence or consent has not been obtained self, in the following words :-"That the following proviso be added to the aod such service has not been made or dispensed with.” And rule 24 of the resolutions of this court of June 21, 1866, and of December 8, 1881, in Orders of 1878 under the Settled Estates Aot provides that “every order sball respect of the Conduit Mead Estate-viz., 'Provided always that the City state, in addition to the names of the petitioners, the names of the Lands Committee be empowered to make a special recommendation to the persons other than the petitioners who concur or consent, or to court in respect of the tenure to be granted, and the terms thereof, in

whom notice of the application has been given, ... and also the any case in which the particular circumstances appear to the committee names of the persons, if any, notice to whom has been dispensed witb." to make it proper so to do.'"

In the present case an order had been made by the court apon a petition It is, therefore, open to lessees in default to claim that renewals should

under the Settled Estates Aot approving of a contraot for the sale of part

of a settled estate. In making this order the court had dispensed with the be granted where an equivalent to a perpetually renewable lease cannot be given by means of a lease for ninety years or less, which happens

concurrence or consent of some persons entitled in remainder, subsequent

to an estate tail which was vested in an infant, but no notice was given to notably in cases where the lease is vested in trustees for tenants for life

those persons, and neitber the petition nor the order stated the names of and remaindermen.

Joun NICHOLAS Mason.

those persons. The parohaser objected that these persons were not bound 32, Gresham-street, April 12.

by the order for sale, and that, therefore, he would not obtain a good titlo to the property sold. A sommons under the Vendor and Parohaser Aot was taken out to determine the question. Hall, V.O., held that a good title could be made, and the Court of Appeal (JESSEL, M.R., and COTTON

and LINDLEY, L.JJ.) affirmed his decision. On the appeal, it was urged There cannot be said, remarks the Times reporter, to be any “arrears" that section 70 did not apply, because the order for sale was on the face of of the business in Banc at Westminster, all the cases being fresb. There it a wrong order. JEESEL, M.R., tbonght that the Vice-Chancellor's decision are some cases in the “Crown Paper" and some “ appeals from inferior was quite right. He admitted that the original order was quite wrong. courts," but the ordinary business arising in the superior courts, especially It was entirely opposed to the provisions of the Settled Estates Aot. The the new trial business, in which the arrears used to be enormous—is all persons entitled in remainder ooght to have been named in the petition and disposed of except cases entirely new. As regards new trials, all applica- the order. The order was, therefore, wrong in form. But then camo tions up to the 29th of March have been heard and disposed of except a section 70 of the Conveyancing Aot, and the exception in section 40 of the few which bave stood over by arrangement. At the London sittings, of the Act of 1877 applied to this very cage. The only suggestion made was whole number of the cases in the list - viz., 387—243 have been disposed of in that seotion 70 did not apply when it could be seen on the face of the One way or another. Of the special jury ca888 47 bave been tried and 33 order that it was wrong Bat who was to see it? The parobaser could withdrawn or strock out, wbile 41 bave been made remanets by order, and not. It was true a learned lawyer might, and in this sense, but in no 33 have been made remanets from want of time to try them. Of tbe como her, it appeared on the face of the order that it was wrong. To say mon jury oases 79 have been tried and 78 have been withdrawn or struck that, because it might be found out by a person of skill and learning that out, while 34 have been made remanets by order, and 24 have been made the order on the face of it was wrong, section 70 did not apply, was simply remanets for want of time to try them. Of the 18 cases put down for trial to ask the court to repeal a very plain enactment, made for tbe protection without jarion 11 bave been tried, 3 bave been withdrawn or strook out, | of a purchaser. The purchaser was not bound to inquire. Ho saw an and 4 bave been made remanets by order.

order made by a court which might bave had jurisdiotion to make it, cod he was not to suffer because the order was wrong. The claims of the saying now and fresh matter had come before them. We preferred that they persons interested in the property were transferred to the purchase-money. should deal with it, and they did so, and refused to disturb our decision. COTTON, L.J., was of opinion that section 70 applied equally, whether it Russell said there was no direction, only a suggestion to apply. This was did or did not appear on the face of the order that it was wrong. an appeal to the merciful discretion of the court. The object of the order LINDLEY, L.J., said that, so long as the order was made by the right court, had been satisfied- the papers were given up the day the order was drawn up. section 70 was amply sufficient to care any saob blunder. The effeot of Mr. Lewis had shown that, well or ill, he had acted on the advice of his section 70 was to give a statutory title to the purchaser when the order had counsel, Mr. Murphy, and two other members of the bar-a Ivice conscienbeen made by the right oourt.-SOLICITORS, Ramsden f Austin; Freeman di tiously given, and the soundness of which was not material. Thus acting on Bothamley.

it he could not be said to be contumacious. Mr. Maitland, who applied for the writ, said he was satisfied that all the documents he prayed for had been

delivered up. It was quite sufficient penalty for Mr. Lewis to have to pay the LANDLORD AND TENANT-FARMING LEASE-RESERVATION OF MINES AND serious costs already incurred, and the more serions peoalty of the reflections MINERALS—RIGHT OF TENANT TO SELL FLINTS-CUSTOM OF COUNTRY.- cast on him by the bench. He thought the dignity of the court did not In a case of Tucker v. Linger, before the Court of Appeal on the 5th inst., a require that Mr. Lewis should go to gaol. question arose as to the right of a tepant under an agreement for a farming | Murphy said he did not wish to add anything to this, and lease to sell for his own profit flint stones, which he had ploughed up in the 1 4. . Smith said his client quite concurred in the application; he had got ordinary course of the cultivation of the land. The agreement contained all the documents he required, and had no personal feeling of animosity stipulations by the tenant (the defendant) not to commit waste, and not to against Mr. Lewis. use the land for other than agricultural purposes, and it reserved to the plaintiff, the landlord, all mines and minerals, sand, quarries of stone, brick

GROVE, J.-To my mind this is a very serious matter indeed. As it now earth, and gravel pits. The defendant contended that he bad a right to

stands it is by no means free from doubt and difficulty. Mr. Lewis bar remove and sell the flints under the custom of tbe county, and that he was

been twice before the court-first, when the court made the order for the not precluded from so doing by the terms of the agreement. Kay, J.

delivery of the papers, and again, on the motion for an attachment. But (30 W. R. 425), decided in favour of the defendant, and the Court of Appeal

i for one matter I could not accept the explanation now offered ; and the Court (JESSEL, M.R., and COTTON and LINDLEY, L.JJ.) affirmed his decision.

of Appeal could, if they liked, deal with the matter in their discretiop. JESSEL, M.R., said that the first question was whether a custom had

This matter is, that when Mr. Lewis handed over the documents to Mr. been proved to exist in the district. An agricultural custom need

- Maitland's solicitor he was acting under the advice of counsel of eminence, not have existed from time immemorial; it was sufficient if it

and this weighs muoh with me, though the advice was not judioious, to say

and this weigos was proved to have existed for a reasonable time. It depended

the least of it. When Mr. Marphy said “his client may have been ill not entirely on what the witnesses · said the custom was, but

advised" I did not know he was alloding to himself. He urged we had on what they proved to have been publicly done in the district. not made our order suffioiently specific; that is usually done by the offioer On the evidence, his lordabip thought it was proved that there was a

of the court. But any one must have known that its scope and parport was oustom for tenants of agricultural land to piok up the flints which were

to deliver up all doonments which Mr. Lewis had acquired wbioh were torned up in the ordinary course of husbandry, and to cell them for their

essential to Mr. Maitland's defence, to enable the new solicitor to go on with own profit, and he thought that such a custom was not abreasonable. It | the case, not to get possession of any property of Mr. Maitland's. And this was proved that, if the flints were all left, they would prevent the growth of

is tolerably evident from Mr, Lewis's affidavit. I cannot help thinking if he anything on the farm. All the witnesses agreed that the large flints must

bad acted candidly and bonestly he would have given up all the documente, be removed. It was not uoreasonable tbat the tenant, who was compelled

and not construed “belonging to" au pied de la lettre in striotDess, as to remove the flints because they would be injurious to the land, should be

exoluding any papers which he might have acquired quâ solicitor by paying able to sell them for his own profit. The court ought not to interfere with

for them. This order was not a final one, merely to operate during the a wellestablished custom on the ground that it was anreasonable, without

trial, following the precedent of Lord Cottenham. If the thing had been some very strong reasons for doing so. Farmers, like other people, knew

thought of it would have been specified. Mr. Lewis's lion was not their own business a great deal better than lawyera did. And, on the words destroyed, it was only saperseded, and still continued. I still think if Mr. of the agreement, bis lordship came to the conclusion that there was not

Lewis had behaved properly he would have delivered ap the papers withont sofficient to exclude the custom. The word “minerals" must be construed

demur, without“ special pleading" to our order and cavilling at it. A con80 as not to include that whicb, according to the custom of the country, the

tempt was, therefore, shown, and though Mr. Lewis was advised by three tenant was entitled to sell. COTTON, L.J., said that if the decision of the

| learned counsel, I dissent from the advice they gave. I should be sorry if it case had rested with him he should have felt very great difficulty in

| went forth to the world that a man could commit a contempt and then appeal finding on the evidence that the alleged custom had been proved, and, if

until he was beaten and imprisoned, and then at the last moment explain the custom was not proved, the word “minerals” in the agreement would

and upset the judgment, and that after the court bad been set at practical include the flinte. LINDLEY, L.J., agreed with the Master of the Rolls that

defiance, the sole penalty to be borne being to bave to pay the costs of a the custom was proved.-SOLICITORS, Mercer & Mercer ; Morrisons.

properly brought motion. But for that matter I think the writ ought to bavo proceeded. I do not say the Court of Appeal indicated to as what

course we ought to adopt. I tbiok it was simply an act of courtesy on their ADMINISTRATOR-POWER TO MORTGAGE INTESTATE'S LEASEHOLDS FOR

part. It is a fact, also, that the documents were handed over on the day of REPAIRS.--In a case of Ricketts v. Lewis, before Fry, J., on the 3rd inat.,

the order, and tbat it was said that they were in court ready to be handed the question arose whether an administrator has power to mortgage lease.

over. Though I bave a very great deal of doubt, I think we may comply holds of the intestate in order to raise money for necessary repairs. The

| with the motion, and that the writ may drop. But it was a very grave conintestato died in 1833. In 1869 his administratrix (all his debts having

tempt. Now, it seems that Mr. Lewis has submitted to the court, and he been paid) mortgaged a leasehold farm, part of the property of the intestate,

will have to pay all the costs. We do not act from vengeance or any personal to her solicitor to secure £100. The mortgage deed (in which the mort.

feeling ; but the court has to see that the law is obeyed by force if required. If gagor was described as administratrix) contained a recital that parts of the

their orders are laughed at and get at defiance, the sooner they cease to sit

the better. I do this with much doubt and hesitation; but I do not wish buildings of the farm had become dilapidated, and that the administratrix, as snob, bad no funds wherewith to repair and reinstate the same; and the

to appear, nor, I hope, does any judge on the bench, to act from any personal deed parported to charge the $100 on the leasehold estate, as well as opon

feeling. the beneficial interest of the administratrix therein. Tbe lease under which HUDDLESTON, B., concurred. The rule for an attachment would be disthe property was held had been granted in the reign of Queen Elizabeth charged, Mr. Lewis paying all the costs both in that court, and in the Court for a term of 999 years, and it was not shown that it contained any covenant of Appeal, by the lessee to repair. Fry, J., held that the administratrix had no power Russell asked that a writ of supersedeas might be granted to the sheriff, to mortgage for the purpose of repaire, and that the mortgage was valid and the court granted it.-Times. only to the extent of her own beneficial interest. -SOLICITORS, Field, Roscoe, & Co.; I. H. Wrentmore,

OBITUARY.
SOLICITORS' CASES.
High COURT OF JUSTICE.-QUEEN'S BENCE DIVISION.

MR. SYDNEY JOHN MITCHELL.
(Sittings in Banc before GROVE, J., and HUDDLESTON, B.)

Mr. Sydney John Mitchell, solicitor, of Birmingham and Solibull, was killed April 5.—Ex parte Lewis.

near Solihull on the 22nd ult. He was witnessing some experiments in This was an application to the court, made at the suggestion of the Court blowing up with gunpowder the roots of some trees which had been blowo of Appeal, to discharge the writ of attachment granted agaiost Mr. E. D. down during last autumn, when a sudden explosion took place, and he was Lewis, a solicitor jante, p. 361), for a contempt in disobeying an order of the struck on the head with a large piece of timber, and died almost immediately. court to deliver up certain papers, documents, &c., which were necessary to Mr, Mitchell was the son of the late Mr. John Mitchell, of Birmingham (the the defence of a Mr. Maitland, a former client, who will shortly be tried for well-known steel pen manufacturer), and was born in 1829. He was admitted perjury at the Old Bailey.

a solicitor in 1851, and he had an extensive practice at Birmingham and Soli. č. Russell, Q.C., and Murphy, Q.C., appeared in support of the applica. Lull. His son, Mr. Sydney Mitchell, who was admitted a solioitor in 1880, was tion.

associated in partnership with him. Mr. Mitchell had been for several years · Lumley Smith, Q.C., and G. Candy, appeared for Mr. Maitland.

| principal Conservative registration agent for North Warwicksbire. He was HUDDLESTON, B.- Did the Court of Appeal direct us to entertain this also registrar of the Solihull County Court (Circuit No. 22) and clerk to the application? I remember in a similar matter about a Mr. Owen, they con- county magistrates at Solibull. He leaves a widow and six children. He was sulted my brother Field and myself with great courtesy as to the malter, buried at Solihull on the 27th alt.

to be heard before Chitty, J., On Apr 22.

Mr. ROBERT ELLISON BURROWS, solicitor (of the firm of Ellison, Burrows, MR. RICHARD HOWSE.

& Freeman), of Cambridge, Royston, and Haverhill, has been appointed a Mr. Richard Howse, solicitor (of the firm of Howse & Percival), of North | Perpetual Commissioner for Cambridgeshire and Suffolk for taking the ampton and Towcester, died at the former place on the 26th ult. “Mr. Howse | Acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women. was born in 1831. He was admitted a solicitor in 1853, and he practised at Mr. ROBERT JOHN CROSTHWAITE, barrister, has been appointed to officiate Northampton and Towcester in partnership with Mr. Thomas Mieres Percival. as Judicial Commissioner for the Central Provinces of India. Mr, Crosthwaite Be was a perpetual commissioner for Northamptonshire, and he had a very was educated at Merchant Taylors' School, and he was formerly scholar of extensive private practice. Te also held several public appointments at Tow. Brasenose College, Oxford. He was called to the bar at the Middle Temple cester, being olerk to the Towcester Highway Board, to the county magis. in Trinity Term, 1868, and he is a member of the Bengal Civil Service. trates. Mr. Howse took an active part in municipal affairs at Northampton.

Mr. JAMES O'KINEALY, barrister, has been appointed to act as a Judge of He had been for many years a member of the town council, and he was a

the High Court of Judicatare at Calcutta. Mr. O'Kinealy was called to the feoffee of St. Giles's parish, a trustee of the General Charities, and a governor of the infirmary. He was a strong Cons:rvative, and he took an aotive part

bar at Lincoln's-ina in Trinity Term, 1873. against Mr. Bradlaugh in the recent election. It has been stated that Mr. Mr. JOHN GORRIE, Chief Justice of Fiji, has received the honour of KoightHowse's death was caused by injuries inflicted by an election mob, but this bood. Sir John Gorrie was born in 1830. He was admitted a member of the has been contradicted. The deceased leaves a widow, but no family. He Faculty of Advocates in Scotland in 1846, and he became an advocate depute was buried at Farnborough, Hampshire, on the 30th ult.

in 1869. In the following year he was appointed Advocate-General for Mauritius, and he was a puisne judge in that colony from 1870 till 1876,

when he was appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the colony of MR. OSBORNE DAUNCEY,

Fiji. Mr. Osborne Dauncey, solicitor (the head of the firm of Dauncey, Turner, & Chanter), of Wotton-under-Edge, died on the 5th inst., after a long ill.

DISSOLUTION OF PARTNERSHIP. ness. Mr. Dauncey was born in 1826. He was educated at the Blue Coat

GEORGE FRANCIS HUGGINS and EDWARD MALLARD, Birmingham, solicitors. School at Gloucester. He was admitted a solicitor in 1861, and he had since March 31. The business will be henceforth carried on by the said Edward practised at Wotton-under-Edge, where, mainly by his own exertions, he had Mallard alone.

[Gazetts, April 7.] acquired a very extensive and lucrative practice. Mr. Arthur Henry Turner and Mr. Arthur Henry Chanter had been for some time associated in partner. ship with him. He was a perpetual commissioner for Gloucestersbire, and he had been for several years olerk to the magistrates at Wotton-under-Edge.

COMPANIES.
He was for three years mayor of the borough of Wotton, and he had also
been church warden of the parish. Mr. Dauncey leaves a widow, but no
family.

WINDING-UP NOTICES.
JOINT STOCK COMPANIES.

LIMITED IN CHANCEBY.
SOCIETIES.

ASTON HALL COAL AND BRICK COMPANY, LIMITED.-Chitty, J., has fixed Apr 18 at 11,

at his chambers, for the appointment of an official liquidator
CITY OF LONDON PRINTING AND STATIONERY COMPANY, LIMITED.-Hall, V has fixed

Apr 18 at 1, at his chambers for the appointment of an official liquidator
LAW ASSOCIATION.

CHERAXBADI (WYNAAD) DISTRICT GOLD MINING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for

winding up, presented Apr 1, directed to be heard before Chitty At the usual monthly meeting of the directors, held at the ball of the

Richardson, Broad st bldgs, solicitor for the petitioners Incorporated Law Society, Chancery-lane, on the 6th ingt., the following COUNTESTHORPE BRICK AND TILE COMPANY, LIMITED.--Creditors are required, on or being present-viz., Mr. Desborough (obairman), and Messrs. Boodle, Col. before May 5, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts

or claims, to John Thornton, 19, Cank st, Leicester. May 19 at 11 is appointed for lisson, Desborough, jun., Soadding, and A. B. Carpenter (seoretary)-a

hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims grant of £15 was made to the daughter of a deceased member, two new HENSMAN AND Co., LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented Mar 20, directed to members were elected, and the ordinary general businees was transacted. be heard before Hall, V.C., on Apr 21. Eardley and Co, Charles st, St James' 89,

solicitors for the petitioners HOUSE SANITARY APPLIANCES AND INSPRCTION COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for

winding up, presented Apr 5, directed to be heard before Hall, V.O., on Apr 21. Patey

and Warren, London wall, solicitors for the petitioners LEGAL APPOINTMENTS.

NILGHERRY AND SOUTH INDIAN GOLD MINING SYNDICATE, LIMITED.-Hall, V.O., has, by an order dated Mar 21, appointed Edward Llewellyn Ernest, Queen street place,

Cannon st, to be official liquidator

NORTH WALES FRBEHOLD COPPER MINES AND SMELTING COMPANY, LIMITED,-By an Mr. WILLIAM COCKERELL, barrister, has been appointed Recorder of the

order made by Fry, J., dated Mar 31, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Borough of Sudbury, in succession to the late Mr. Thomas Hacke Naylor. Wynne and Son, Chancery lane, agents for Brabner and Court, Liverpool, solicitors Mr. Cockerell was called to the bar at the Middle Temple in Trinity Term, for the petitioners 1865. He is a member of the South-Eastern Circuit, practising locally at

NEW PENROSE TIN AND COPPER MINE COMPANY, LIMITED.-By an order made by Hall,

V.C., dated Mar 31, it was ordered that the company be wound up. Campbell and Cambridge.

Co, Warwick st, Regent st, solicitors for the petitioner Mr. ALFRED EWEN, solicitor (of the firm of Eken & Roberts), of Luton,

STANDARD CREDIT COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up, presented Apr 6,

directed to be heard before Hall, V.O., on Apr 21. Morgan, Coleman st, petitioner has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court WHITWORTE PARK GRAND STAND COMPANY, LIMITED.-Creditors are required, on or of Judicature.

before May 1 to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts or

claims to Benjamin Smyrke, of Sunderland. May 10 at 12 is appointed for hearing Mr. DUNCAN MACKENZIE, solicitor (of the firm of Sladen & and adjudicating upon the debts and claims Mackenzie), of 1,. Delahay-street, Westminster, has been appointed

[Gazette, April. 7.] a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the Acknowledgments of CAPITAL FIRE INSURANCE ASSOCIATION, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up presented Married Women for the County of Middlesex and the Cities of London and Apr 1, directed to be heard before Fry, J., on Apr 21. Brandon, Essex st, Strand, soli. Westminster.

citor for the petitioner

GLENROY LEAD MINING COMPANY, LIMITED.-Petition for winding up presented Apr 3 Mr. ARTHUR PHILLIPS, barrister, of Calcutta, has been appointed to

directed to be heard before Hall, V.C., on Apr 21. Jackson, Gracechurch st, agent

for Scholey and Co, Wakefield, solicitors for the petitioners officiate as Advocate-General of Bengal. Mr. Phillips was called to the bar

SWARY COMPANY LIMITED. Petition for winding up presented Apr 5, at the Middle Temple io Hilary Term, 1867.

directed to be heard before Hall, V.O., on Apr 21. Sykes, Old Broad st, agent for

Watson and Dickons, Bradford, solicitors for the petitioner Mr. WILLIAM MUSTARD, solicitor, of 7, Furnival's-ino, and of Manningtree WHITEHAVEN IRON MINES, LIMITED.-By an order made by Bacon, V.C., dated Apr 1, and Mistley, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the it was ordered that the mines be wound up. Jackson, Gracechurch st, agent for Supreme Court of Judicature.

Jackson, Malton, York, solicitor for the petitioner

WOOD AND IVERY, LIMITED.-By an order made by Bacon, V.C., dated Apr 1, it was Mr. WILLIAM BONNERJEE, barrister, of Calcutta, has been appointed to act ordered that the yoluntary winding up be continued. Tucker and Lake, Serle st, as Standing Counsel to the Bengal Government. Mr. Bonnerjee was called

Lincoln's inn, agents for Wragge and Co, Birmingham, solicitors for the petitioners to the bar at the Middle Temple in Trinity Term, 1867.

[Gazetto, Apr. 11.)

UNLIMITED IN CHANOBRY. Mr. GEORGE WILLIAM JENNINGS. solicitor. of Bishop Auckland. has been MUTUAL AID PERMANENT BENEFIT BUILDING SOCIETY.-Creditors are required, on or appointed Clerk to the Magistrates at that place, in succession to his partner,

before May 12, to send their names and addresses, and the particulars of their debts the late Mr. Richard Bowser.

or claims, to Frederick William Linley, 12, Broad st, Bristol. June 5 at 12 is ap

pointed for hearing and adjudicating upon the debts and claims Mr. PETER GELLATLY, solicitor (of the firm of Gellatly, Son, & Warton),

[Gazette, Apr. 7.] of 2, Lombard-court, Gracechurch-street, has been appointed a Magistrate

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES DISSOLVED.

EIHALL SCHOOL FRIENDLY SOCIETY FOR MALES, School Room, Exhall, Warwick. for the County of Essex. mr. Gellatly was admitted a solicitor in 1856. Mr. SYDNEY MITCHELL, solicitor, of Birmingham and Solihull, bas deen

FRIENDLY SOCIETY OF WITCHAMPTON, CHALDURY, HINTON MARTEL, HINTON PARVA,

LONG AND MORE CRICIEL, TABRANT RUSHTON, AND OTHER PARISHES, Witchampton, appointed Clerk to the County Magistrates at Soliboll, in succession to his Dorset. Apr 3 father, the late Mr. Sydney John Mitchell. Mr. Mitchell, junior, was ad- TENTERDEN £10 BURIAL SOCIETY, Working Men's Club, Jackson's lane, Tenterden, mitted a solicitor in 1881.

Kent, Apr 3

[Gazette, Apr. 7.] · Mr. HENRY BELK, solicitor, of Hartlepool, has been elected Town Clerk of ALFRETON PROVIDENT SOCIETY FOR MUTUAL SELF AID, Red Lion Inn, Alfreton, Derby. that borough on the resignation of Mr. Thomas Belk. Mr. H. Belk was ad. Apr 6 mitted a solicitor in 1878.

DUKE OF YORK DISTRICT BURIAL FRIENDLY SOCIETY, 196, Brownlow bil, Liverpool.

Apr 5 Mr. FREDERICK LANGWORTHY, solicitor, of Modbury, has been appointed OXFORD FRIENDLY INSTITUTION, 29, Pembroke st, Oxford. Apr 6 & Perpetual Commissioner for Devonshire for taking the Acknowledgments of ROYAL STANDARD BENEFIT SOCIETY, Greyhound Inn, Chalfont St Peter's, Bucks. Apr 5. Deeda by Married Women.

UNITED BENEFIT SOCIATY, Plough Inn, Tring, Hertford, Apr 5

[Gazetto, Apr 11.)

Apr 4

WROATI, DIGOBY, Truro, Cornwall. Gent. April 24. Ripper v Clark, Bacon, V.C

Cock, Truro
NEW ORDERS, &c.

[ Gazette, Mar. 31.) BROWN, THOMAS, Embleton, Durham, Farmer. May 12. Brown v Brown, Hall, V.C.

Lawson, Sunderland HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE -CHANCERY DIVISION.

DOUBBLE, THOMAS, Leather lane, Holborn, Gentleman. Apr 10. Doubble v Doubble, ORDER OF COURT.

Bacon, V.C. Metcalfe, Furnival's inn, Holborn

Evans, MARY, Carmarthen. May 2. Ferrior v Evans, Chitty, J. Evans, Cardigan

Saturday, April 8, 1882. GOTF, ROBERT, The Albany, Piccadilly, Captain 16th Regiment of Lancers. Apr 30. Whereas, from the present state of the business before Mr. Justice Kay and Goff v Dickson, Fry, J. Perkins, Gray's inn sq Mr. Justice Chitty, it is expedient that a portion of the causes assigned to Mr. JONES Evans, Lampeter, Cardigan, Apr 28. Jenkins y Lloyd, Bacon, V.C. Lloyd,

Lampeter Justice Chitty should for the purpose only of trial or hearing be transferred to 1

[Gazette, April 4.] Mr, Justice Kay; Now I, the Right Honourable Roundell Baron Selborne, Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, do hereby order that the several

ALFORD, JOHN GRIFFITHS, Thorne, Birley, Hereford, Esq. May 8. Hunt v Parry, Fry,

J. Sale, Leominster causes set forth in the schedule hereto be accordingly transferred from the BARNS, WILLIAM, Haselmere, Surrey, Timber Merchant. May 6. Barns v Chandler, said Mr. Justice Chitty to Mr. Justice Kay, for the purpose only or trial or

Chitty, J. Mellersh, Godalming hearing, and be marked in the cause-books accordingly. And this order is to

BATEMAN, BENJAMIN, White Lion ct, Cornhill, Merchant. May 15. Illins v Bateman,

Hall, V.C. Hollams and Co, Mincing lane be drawn up by the registrar and set up in the several offices of the Ohancery Coxon, THOMAS, Draycott, Derby, Farmer. May 15. Gregory v Oldershaw, Hall, V.C. Division of the High Court of Justice.

Abney, Derby

COCKERTON, JONAS, Austin friars, Gent. May 15. Cockerton v Baker, Hall, V.C. Schedule.

Pilgrim and Phillips, Coleman st

DANIELS, MARY ANNB, Harwich, Essex, Miller. May 23. Alexander v Constable, Hall, Evershed v Evershed 1881 E 717 | De Zaccato v Fairholme 1881 D V.0. Elwes, Colchester Harwood v Wbincup 1881 H 1,503 1,061

FBARNLEY, FAIRFAX, Hooton Pagnell Hall, York, Esq. May 15. Fearnley v Fearnley, London and Provincial Traders' Whole. Bettyes v Maynard 1880 B

Hall, V.O. Nettleship, John st, Bedford row 0,516

FRARNLEY, MARY ANN, Hooton Pagnell Hall, York. May 15. Fearnley v Fearnley, sale Stores (Limited) v City Syndi. Pierce v Entwisle 1881 P 1,025

Hall, V.O. Bannister and Fache, John st, Bedford row cate (Limited) 1881 L '15" Bateman v Browne 1881 B 3,032 FELLOWS, SUSANNAH, Cradley Heath, Rowley Regis. April 120. Attwood y Bloomer, Austin v Bird 1880 A 670 Rust v Victoria Graving Dock Co

Registrar, Dudley. Homfray and Holbertson, Brierley Hill Lloyd's Banking Company v Mac. 1881 R 206

FIRTA, MARIA JANE, New Bond st, Superintendent of the Association of Nurses. May

5. Moorhouse v Sprigg, Chitty, J. `Ingle, Threadneedle st alister 1881 L 3,050 Heiron v Foster 1881 H 1,035

GILBERT, ELIZA SUSANNA, Hilldrop crescent, Holloway. May 2. Gilbert v Hudleston, Sutton v. Sutton 1880 S 3,047 Billyard v Swan 1881 B 6,410 Hall, V.C. Room, Bouverie st, Fleet st Beedbam v Simpson 1877 B 552 Simpson v Sidebottom 1881 S 1.126 | HEAD, HENRY THOMAS, Blackfriars rd, Surgical Instrument Maker. May 3. Hogg v

Head, Hall, V.0. Todd and Dennes, Chancery lane Lock v Olive 1880 L 0,195 Clarke v. Yorke 1881 C 1,524

HUMBER, WILLIAM, Portland villas, Brixton hill, Civil Engineer. May 1. Humber v Norwich and Norfolk, &c., Building Pledger v Seabrook 1881 P 2,612 Humber, Bacon, V.0. Braund, Furnival's inn Society v Martinson 1880 N 0,379 Oldbury Local Board of Health v

MOATE, SEPTIMUS RICHARD, Little Westwood, Hereford, Gent. May 5. Moate v Cooke,

Hall, v.C. Cobb, Lincoln's inn fields Piller v Roberts 1880 P 1,599 Baker 1880 0 424

PALLISRR, Sir WILLIAM, Knt., C.B., M.P., Earl's Court sg, South Kensington, May Piller v Roberts 1881 P 156 Charlton v North British Ry Co 1881 8. Palliser v Palliser, Chitty, J. Woodroffe, Lincoln's inn fields Pitman v Buckler 1881 P 908 C5,801

RIGG, GBORGB, Kendal, Westmorland, Retired Weaver. May 8. Hoaksey v Atkinson Ross v Ross 1881 R 2,414

Central Bank of London, Limited y Bacon, V.C. Dobson, Kendal Ward v Ward 1881 W 4,367 Jackson 1881 C 937

THOMPSON, SARAH, Birmingham. May 2. Clarke v Cooper, Bacon, V.C. Turner and

Son, Carey st, Lincoln's inn fields Temperance Permanent, &c., Build. Johnston v Liverpool Marine Credit TUDOR, FREDERIC CHARLES, Raymond bldgs, Gray's inn, Solicitor. May 6. Tudor v ing Society v Banks 1881 T 2,610 Co, Limited 1881 J 503

Tudor, Bacon, V.O. Calcott, Lincoln's inn fields The Mutual Society v Torkington | Hodgson v Mawer 1881 H 5,203 WADSLEY, SABAT JANE, Billinghay Dales, Lincoln. May 1. Auckland v Wadsloy, 1881

Hall, V.0. Hebb, Lincoln
M 1,324
In re Smedley Chesterfield, &c, Bkg

| WIGHTMAN, JAMES, Pontefract, York, Gent. Mayl. Midgley v Hall, Fry, J. Coleman, Cox v Riley 1881 C 210

Co v Smedley 1881 S 5,626

Pontefract Stanford v Horsham Local Board | Leyland & Co'y Vaughan, Brothers,

WILKINS, ERNEST POWELL, Newport, Isle of Wight, Doctor of Medicine. May 5. 1881 S 3,751 & Co 188 L 617

Wilkins y Mew, Bacon, V.O. Järyis, Chancery lane King v Smith 1881 K 494 In re Newham Shipman v Boast

[Gazete, April 7.) Warren v Craik 1881 W 4,105 1881 N 811 Thornton v Stone 1881. T 1,873 In re Newham Newham y Boast

CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. CAP. 35. Wood v Smith 1881 W 4,487 1881 N 1,076

LAST DAY OF CLAIM. Goodall v Hutcbipgs 1881 G 2,881 Jenkins y Edwards 1881 J 1,078 COOPER, HBNRY, Liverpool, Edge Tool Maker. May 1. Smith and Son, Liverpool Standing v Wolmershausen 1881 S Edwards v Jenkins 1881 E 1,759

ELLIS, MARY ANX, Plymouth. June 24. Rooker and Co, Plymouth

FENWICK, CAROLINX, Great Malvern, Worcester. Apr 30. Western and Sons, Strand 142 Goldthorpe v Gilbraith 1881 G 1,725

Fox, GEORGE, Plymouth, Gent. May 20. Fox, Plymouth Cropper v Smith 1881 C 2,207 Buxton i Sowter 1880 B 4,007 FREAR, PAUL, East Bridgford, Nottingham, Farmer. May 27. Pratt and Hodgkinsons, Martinson v Clowes 1880 M 0,649 | Wandsworth Board of Works v Stiff

Newark-on. Trent

GILBERT, JANE DANIEL, Mutley, Devon. Apr 20. Graves, Devonport Lakoman v Lose 1882 L 201 1882 B 6,856

GREGORÝ, MATILDA, Upton, Nottingham. May 13. Newbald and Falkner, Newark Harvey v Harvey 1881 H 5,121 Panchard v Jones 1881 P 2,254 GRIFFITI, Axx, Tillington Court, Hereford. Apr 29. Swayne, Glastonbury Watson v Holliday 1881 W 1,439 | Tibbs v Blaiberg 1881 T 1,859

HARLISS, JAMES, Coningsby, Lincoln, Gent. May 18. Clitherow and Elsey, Horncastlo Farwig v Macey & Co 1881 F 1,843

HINDLEY, JOIN, Sutton Coldfield, Warwick, Farmer. Apr 8. Holbecho and AddenAnderson v Liebeg's Extract of Meat

brooke, Sutton Coldfield Sainsbury v steeds 1881 S 1,016 Co 1881 A 1,673

HOWARD, EMMA, Norwood, Surrey. Apr 29. Paines and Co, Gresham House, E.C. Blakeley v Luke 1881 B 3,911 Graham y Robson 1880 1 3,847 HOWARD. MARY Anx, Norwood. Apr 29. Paines and Co, Gresham House

IRELAND, Jonx, Birmingham. Apr 5, Beaton and Adcock, Birmingham
Plaxton v Plaxton 1881 P 1,450 | Dunball v Broad St, &c, Workshop
Lane v Norman 1881 L

JACKSON, John, Milner st, Chelsea, Licensed Victualler. May 25. Holland, Knightrider
21
Co, Limited 1881 D 1,587

st, Doctors' commons Cairnes v Whittle 1881 C 5,871 | Foster v Addy 1881 F 1,279 Jones, MARIA, Waterloo, Lancaster. May 16. Sale and Co, Manchester Beresford v Batthyany 1882 B 351 | Heatley v Junior Army and Navy

JONES, ROBERT, Leytonstone, Gardener. Apr 25. Lewis, Llanbedr, Merioneth Dovener v Proctor 1881 D 1,862 Stores, Limited 1882 H 84

KLEIN, SOPHIA CHRISTINA, Upper Lisson st, Marylebone, Baker, Apr 20. Chappell,

Molyneux st, Edgware rd North British Ry Co v Charlton 1881

LAYCOCK, WILLIAM, Withington, Lancaster, Yarn Merchant. Apr 20. Doyle, Man. C1,878

SELBORNE, C.

chester Baker ( Greayeon 1882 B 478

MILLS, MARIA, Russell sq. May 8. Poole and Co, Chancery lane
MURRAY, AUGUSTA ELIZA ANNA, Bloxham, Oxford. Apr 22. Still and Son, Lincoln's inn
MURRAY, GEORGE ST. VINCENT THOMAS NELSON, Shrivenbam, Berks. May 17. Murray,

Shrivenham
Owex, Sir HUGH, Hornsey lane, Knight. May 5. Lewis and Co, Queen Victoria st

Povau, Rev. JOIN VIGDEN, Dawson pl, Bayswater. Apr 30. Prideaux, Goldsmiths'
CREDITORS' CLAIMS.

Hall
POWELL, CHARLOTTE, Gelligaer, Glamorgan. Apr 22. Lowis and Jones, Merthyr Tydfil

PRICE, MABY ELIZA, Cheltenham. June 1. Bubb and Co, Cheltenham
CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY.

PBOTHERO, SOPHIA CECILIA, Westbourne park. Apr 29. Macdonald and Malden,

Salisbury
LAST DAY OF PROOF.

RAISILEY, WILLIAM CHARLES PERBY, South Wellington rd, Hounslow, Esq. May 3. BUCKLEY, JEREMIAI, Salford, Lancaster, Millwright. April 28. Walker v Rowlands,

Harvey and Co, Chancery lane Chitty, J. Newton, Stockport

Robson, MUBBAY ANN MOLBOD, Addison rd, Kensington. May 1. Robinson and

Hilder, Jermyn st
CHESTER, WILLIAM, Swinnerton, Stafford, Brewer. April 28. Taylor v Chester, Chitty,
J. Slaney, Newcastle-under-Lyme

RYDER, ELIZABERI, Shrewsbury. May 1. Hirst, Shrewsbury
Cook, Rev WILLIAM, Wimbledon. April 28. Cook y Cook, Chitty, J. Copp, Essex st,

SAY, HENRY HIRST, Braughing. Hertford, Major. May 9. Booty and Bayliffe, Gray's Strand

inn Ives, Hannas, Shipley, near Bradford. April 24. Roebuck v Rhodes, Bacon V.C.

SPOONER, WILLIAM MATHIAS, Strand, Print Seller. May 1. Lewin and Co, Southampton Morgan, Shipley

st, Strand JONES, JOIN, New Kent rd, Draper. April 24. Jones v Searle, Bacon, V.C. Fraser,

SUTHERLAND, ANNIE, Upper Norwood. May 1. Grane and Son, Bedford row Furnival's inn

TwYXAM, MARY, Portswood, Southampton. May 1. Twynam, Blandford sq KENDER, JOHN, Sutton Coldfield, Warwick, House and Estate Agent. April 29. Kender

WOODWARD, CHARLES ELLIOTT, Halifax; Railway Clerk. May l. Stansfeld, Halifax v Stanley, Hall, V.C. Bickley, Birmingham

[Gazette, Mar. 28.) MARTIN, SAMUEL, York, Farmer. April 29. Howarth y Smith, Chitty, J. Tattershall, ANSELL, CHARLES, Brighton, Esq., J.P., D.L., F.R.S. May 1. Griffith and Eggar, Gt James st, Bedford row

Brighton OWENS, Owen, Cefully, Radnor, Farmer. April 24. Jones v Owens, Chitty, J. Cheese, BAKER, FRANCIS BRACKSTONE, Beighton, Derby, Surveyor of Taxes. May 15. Rodgers Chancery lano

and Co, Sheffield SMITH, CHARLES ARTHUR, Willesden. April 30. Smith v Manning, Hall, V.C. Davie, BISHOPP, JAMES, Boughton Aluph, Kent, Farmer. May 8. Hallett and Co, Ashford New inn, Strand

BOWERS, GEORGE, Stratford pl, Camden Town, Gont. May 20. Sawbridge, Milk ste TRUMAN, JAMES, Netherton, Worcester, Boot Manufacturer. April 28. Dawbarn v Cheapsido

Truman, Chitty, J. Smart, Finsbury pavement
WOOD, WILLIAM STUCKEY, Fifehead Magdalen, Dorset, Esq. April 20. Wood v

BREACE, JOHN, Aston Upthorpe, Berks, Surgeon. May 7. Jonos, Hart st, Bloomsbury

squaro Stuckoy, Chitty, J, Estlín, Somerton

| BROWN, EDWARD, Holderness, York, Yeoman, May 1, Eldridge and Stephenson, Hal

« PreviousContinue »