which you have made to us. I should like to join with the Lord Chancellor in expressing our appreciation. I hope that the visit of yourself and all those who have accompanied you has been a happy and a pleasant one. It may, perhaps, seem to some of us that it is a little incongruous, in the midst of a pleasant visit, that one lawyer should address his brother lawyers, but perhaps you will allow me to take this unique opportunity to say one or two words. We have our critics in this country as you have in yours. Even lawyers have their critics, at times ill-informed and without a full knowledge of their subject. But I think everybody in the hall will agree with me that they believe and know that no country can be happy and prosper unless its prosperity is supported by the large number of citizens who are determined in their hearts to maintain the honour and integrity of the law. It is, no doubt, something akin to that feeling which moves the donors of this statue. We in this country sometimes like to think that you in your land have derived some benefit from some things which we are able to give, or perhaps to lend, to you. And this statue is, in your belief, the symbol of one of them. Blackstone's genius is common to both our nations. We both benefit from it, and there has not been a single day during this Congress when I have not heard that the judges of our land derived inestimable benefit from the wisdom of the judges of the United States, who, in their turn, I am sure, will be the first to say that they have derived some of their wisdom from the man whose statue you have presented to us to-day. And I like to think, and I am sure all my brothers like to think, that was your feeling, because you knew that we, too, think that we have given you something in days gone by. I am sure the statue will be greatly regarded by us.

PORTRAIT OF CHANCELLOR KENT.

The Hon. EDWARD R. FINCH: On behalf of the School of Law of Columbia University, one of the oldest schools in America, whose graduates have gone from the school by the dozen to every State known in our Union, the graduates desire me to offer to the Council of Legal Education a portrait of Chancellor James Kent, of New York, a great lawyer, who was also a great commentator on the common law. The portrait will be delivered as soon as it is finished. In addition to his judicial and other duties, Chancellor Kent was a professor in a school of law in America; but as a professor he yet found time to write the four volumes composing his Commentaries. From the graduates of the school I bring this special greeting to the Council of Legal Education in the hope that it will make still another bond of union between them and bind them yet more closely together in the great cause of legal education. Chancellor Kent was universally recognised as, in America, a great commentator on the common law, in the same way as our great English ancestor Blackstone was recognised in this country. He has been rightly called the "Blackstone of America." There is one sentence of his, an understanding of which might help in keeping world peace and in aiding the only practical plan now before the world for the settlement of international disputes through the principles of justice embodied in law rather than through war. It is: "States and bodies politic are to be considered as moral persons having a public will, capable and free to do right and wrong, inasmuch as they are collections of individuals each of whom carries with him into the service of the community the same binding law of morality and religion which ought to control his conduct in private life." The day will come when justice will reign supreme internationally as it does nationally. He was the first Chief Justice of the United States, and when he and those engaged with him were endeavouring to promote a form of government for New York, harassed by the British in arms, they yet cherished the traditions of British law. They were revolutionaries in the interest of order and liberty. And that law continued to be the law of the nation, subject to such modifications as it was seen were necessary to be made. Our master builders wrought their material into a structure which embodied and marked development of the spirit of the common law. Of course there is a differentiation of legislation in the forty-eight States of the Union with respect to their local affairs, but I think everybody will come to the conclusion that there is all along a growing sense of solidarity which governs the conception of liberty and of law, the fundamental conception that we cherish, as we come to this shrine of the common law, as our right as the law of a supreme people. We have inherited a conception of the supremacy of the law as our vocation, and we can only maintain that conception of the law by the aid of a fearless and independent Bench. We have the happy tradition, not only of a fearless and independent Judiciary, but of an equally fearless and independent Bar. There can be no salvation for the people unless there be liberty under the law. We shall not return home quite as we have come to England. It is impossible to leave these historic gatherings without renewed strength and a stronger sense of the brotherhood of the Profession of the law.

Lord Justice ATKIN: I have the honour and the great pleasure to accept, on behalf of the Council of Legal Education, of which I am the chairman, the offer of the picture of your great lawyer and commentator, Chancellor Kent. On an occasion like this, I suppose that you would agree that no description of him would perhaps be more appropriate than to call him the American Blackstone. It was the aim of the great commentator, whose beautiful sculptured figure we have had presented to us to-day, to inculcate

the principles of the common law among those who practise the law as it was known to the whole of the citizens of this country. That was also the aim of Chancellor Kent. I was reading only the other day an extract from his Commentaries, in which he said that the " knowledge intended to be communicated in these volumes is not only that which is essential to every person who pursues the science of the law as a practical profession, but is deemed to be useful and ornamental to gentlemen in every pursuit, and especially to those who are to assume places of judicial trust and to take a share in the councils of our country." That is an ideal which is still cherished, I think, by those who are interested in legal education in this country, by us, who have chiefly to deal with the vocational education of those who are preparing to become members of the Bar. But we have the assistance of great writers who have made it their object to disseminate the great principles on which liberty, justice, and order depend in this country. And, to those who drink from the waters of the common law, it will be a great inspiration that we shall look from time to time upon the portrait of one who was perhaps one of the greatest of those who, upon your side, as others have done on this side, have helped to distribute any general knowledge. We shall accept the picture in recognition of the great fact that we, both of us, are animated by the same principles of law, and we shall also regard it as one more record of that bond of union which was not created for the first time, but which undoubtedly was increased and encouraged by this meeting, this great and historical occasion. I have the greatest pleasure in accepting the offer of the picture on behalf of the council whom I represent.

WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION

REDEMPTION AND WAR ADDITIONS.

IN the Manchester County Court on the 2nd inst., His Honour Judge Mellor, C.B.E., K.Č., delivered the following judgment in Kilgour (applicant) v. Samuel Yarwood and Sons Limited (respondents).

Lustgarten for the applicant.

Gorman for the respondents.

His HONOUR. In this case the facts are admitted. They are as follows: In 1921 the applicant met with a serious accident in the course of his employment and an award was made in his favour of 20s. a week on the ground of total incapacity under the provisions of the Act of 1906. Consequently, he was entitled to receive 15s. a week further under the War Additions Acts 1917 and 1919. The 35s. a week was paid up to January 1922, when the respondents, as they were entitled to, redeemed the payment of the weekly sum of 20s. for a lump sum. Under the provisions in the War Additions Acts 1917 and 1919 the 15s. a week paid under these Acts could not be redeemed and the respondents having paid the lumpsum continued to pay the 15s. a week up the 1st Jan. 1924, when the Act of 1923 came into force. The question for me is: Is the applicant still entitled to receive the 15s. a week, notwithstanding sect. 1 of that Act? The section is as follows: "The Workmen's Compensation (War Addition) Acts 1917 and 1919, shall cease to have effect after the 31st day of December 1923, and are hereby repealed. Provided that the addition provided for in the said Acts shall continue to apply to a weekly payment payable to a workman under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 (hereinafter referred to as the Principal Act), or under any enactment superseded by that Act, in respect of total incapacity arising from an accident which occurred on or before the said 31st day of December so long as the workman remains totally incapacitated, and the addition shall for all purposes, be treated as if it were part of the weekly payment." It was argued by Mr. Gorman for the respondents that inasmuch as the weekly sum of 20s. had been redeemed, there was no weekly pay ment to which the war addition could form part. If that argument is sound the position would be this. That where prior to the 1st Jan. 1924, the weekly sum payable under the Act of 1906 had not been redeemed, the injured person would still be entitled to receive that sum plus the war addition (which under the provisions of the Act of 1923 could be taken into account in any redemption of the weekly sum), but if the 20s. had been redeemed he was not entitled to the war addition. Moreover, any employer who had paid compensation for six months could, between the 26th Nov. 1923, when the Act was passed, and the 1st Jan. 1924, when it came into force, have redeemed the weekly payment and so escaped liability for the war additions. This is an important question, because I am informed that there are many injured men in the same position as this applicant, and I can well believe it, for I know that it is the policy of many insurance companies to redeem whenever they can in order to clear their books. Before I consider this question there are certain rules of construction of the Workmen's Compensation Acts laid down in some judgments of the House of Lords: In Costello v. The Owners of steamship Pigeon (108 L. T. Rep. 929; (1913) A. C. 407), Lord Loreburn says: "This is a remedial Act, and we ought not to read into it an exception without bearing in mind the nature of the remedy which is proposed by the Act itself." In Lysons v. Knowles (84 L. T. Rep. 65; (1901) A. C. 79), Lord Halsbury says: " The first thing, I think, one has to do is to apply one's mind to what is the substantive intention and meaning of the statute." The object of the Act of 1923 is stated just before sect. I

of the Act itself, viz., "The amendment of benefits under the principal Act," and under the Act the benefits to injured persons are largely increased and compensate them for the abolition of the war additions. It is a principle of construction of Acts of Parliament that accrued rights can only be taken away by express words, and contrary intention must be clearly expressed, so that one of the questions I have to determine is whether the language of sect. 1 of the Amendment Act of 1923 is so express and clear as to deprive the applicant of the war addition. By sect. 1 of sub-sect. 2 of the War Additions Act 1917 it is enacted: "The additional weekly sum payable under this Act shall be deemed to be part of the weekly payment under the Act of 1906 for certain defined purposes," but under the Act of 1923 it is treated for all purposes as if it were part of the weekly payment. Nothing is said in the War Additions Act as to the manner in which the payment of the additional sum is to be enforced and the additions have always been treated as forming part of the weekly sum payable under the Principal Act. No injured person could obtain the benefits of the War Additions Act without first obtaining an award of total incapacity under the principal Act. The two together made up a weekly payment payable under the award, and I hold that an award is still effective although part of it has been redeemed and has not been affected by the Act of 1923. I also hold that the language of the section is not so express and clear as to take away the accrued rights of the applicant. Award in favour of applicant.

Solicitors for the applicant, Marsh, Pearson, and Yates; for the respondents, Wood and Lord.

LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL

TO SECRETARIES.-Reports of meetings should reach the office not later than Wednesday evening to ensure insertion in the current number.

THE LAW SOCIETY

HONOURS EXAMINATION.-JUNE, 1924.

The names of the Solicitors to whom the Candidates served under Articles of Clerkship are printed in parentheses.

Ar the Examination for Honours of Candidates for Admission on the Roll of Solicitors of the Supreme Court, the Examination Committee recommended the following as being entitled to Honorary Distinction :

First Class. (In order of merit)

Jenkins, Gathorne Roy, LL.B. London (Mr. Leonard Arthur Wallen, of Blaina), Sykes, Joseph Arthur, B.A. Oxon. (Mr. Godfrey Ernest Castle, of the firm of Messrs. Whitley and Co., of Liverpool.

Second Class. (In alphabetical order)

Cohen, Sebag (Mr. John Spours Nicholson, of the firm of Messrs. J. S. Nicholson and Son, of Sunderland.

Randall, Philip Finch, B.A., LL.B. Cantab. (Mr. George Leslie Wates, of the firm
of Messrs. J. D. Langton and Passmore, of London).
Taylor, William Cecil, B.A., LL.B. Manchester (Mr. James Arthur Atkinson
Taylor, of Bolton).

Third Class. (In alphabetical order)

Ambler, John (Mr. John James Rawsthorn, of the firm of Messrs. Rawsthorn, Ambler, and Booth, of Preston).

Amphlett, John Risdon (Mr. James Amphlett, of the firm of Messrs. Amphlett and Co., of Colwyn Bay; and Messrs. Sharpe, Pritchard, and Co., of London). Anthony, Edgar Holden Hollis, B.A. Oxon. (Messrs. Macdonald and Stacey, of London).

Baker, Thomas Macdonald (Mr. John Owen Gosling, of Weybridge; and Mr. Edwin Thomas Hatt, of Reading).

Butler, George Henry, B.A. Oxon. (Mr. Albert Deards Mason, of Barnsley).
Cave, Reginald Hubert Victor, B.A., LL.B. Cantab. (Mr. Charles Ernest Burton,
of the firm of Messrs. Becke, Green, and Stops, of Northampton).
Evans, Edward Parry (Mr. Evan John Davies, of Cardiff).
Fletcher, Albert (Mr. Robert Whittaker Butcher, of the firm of Messrs. Butcher
and Barlow, of Bury).

Forster, Charles Philip, B.A. Cantab. (Mr. George Edward Wilkinson, M.A., of the
firm of Messrs. Wilkinson and Marshall, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne).
Gains, Stanley George, M.A. Cantab. (Mr. James Jonas Dodd, of the firm of Messrs.
James and Charles Dodd, of London).

Hardcastle, Horace Kenyon (Mr. Charles Edward Churchill, of the firm of Messrs.
Churchill, Clapham, and Co., of London).

Hill, Percy Horace (Mr. David Henry Tompkins, of the firm of Messrs. Cain and Tompkins, of London).

Hobson, Henry John (Mr. Moses Hyman Isaacs, of the firm of Messrs. Hyman Isaacs, Lewis, and Mills, of London).

Lees, John Horsley, B.A., LL.B. Cantab. (Mr. Justus Arthur Poole Phelps Thompson, of the firm of Messrs. Bischoff, Coxe, Bischoff, and Thompson, of London).

Lloyd, John Lewis (Mr. John Norman Bailey, of the firm of Messrs. Gibson and Weldon, of London).

Martin, Alan Alfred Roger (Mr. Alan Scott Martin, of the firm of Messrs. Tucker, Hussey, and Martin, of London).

Russell, Rudyard Holt (Mr. Alfred Tyrer, of the firm of Messrs. Tyrer, Kenion, Tyrer and Simpson, of Liverpool).

Sears, Robert Brierley (Mr. Bernard Edward Halsey Bircham, of the firm of Messrs: Bircham and Co., of London).

Skelt, Alfred (Mr. Stamp William Wortley, LL.B., of Chelmsford ; and Mr. Arthur Owen Warren, of the firm of Messrs. Warren and Penman, of London). White, Leonard William Arthur (Mr. Robert John Willatt, of the firm of Messrs. Brown, Willatt, and Marriott, of Nottingham).

Williams, John Hywel, LL.B. London (Mr. Joseph Henry Bate, of the firm of Messrs. Allington Hughes, Bate, and Newman, of Wrexham, and Messrs. Jaques and Co., of London).

Wilson, Robert Hilton (Lieut.-Col. Daniel Johnston Mason, D.S.O., T.D., of the firm of Messrs. Howson, Dickinson, and Mason, of Whitehaven).

THE following list of the Final Honour School of Jurisprudence has been published:

Class I.-J. B. Blagden, Brasenose; W. A. Davies, Tonbridge and Trin. S. P. Hamilton, Alberta and Univ., Rhodes Scholar; W. Ó. Hart, Rugby and New Coll.; R. G. McKerron, Oriel; D. K. Sen, Calcutta and Oriel; G. F. Shipman, Bradfield and Keble.

Class II.-R. W. M. Atkin, Worcester; C. H. Browne, Queen's; R. A. H. Clyde, New Coll.; C. B. Coolidge, Exeter; J. A. Dunlop, Exeter; J. A. Farmer, Pemb.; S. N. Furness, Oriel; F. P. Hall, Wadham; M. C. Hanna, Balliol; H. J. Hargreaves, Non-Coll.; E. W. Highsmith, Exeter; C. B. Hutchinson, Oriel; O. H. P. Jones, Pemb.; L. H. Kent, C.C.C.; M. W. Lowndes, New Coll.; H. T. Manknell, Lincoln; D. G. E. C. Michaelson, Merton; J. C. Neve, C.C.C.; W. H. Peal, Exeter; D. H. Phillips, New Coll.; R. B. Popkiss, Trin.; P. Richmond, Exeter; S. J. Rustomji, Jesus; J. W. Sears, Merton; A. Shacksnovis, Oriel; C. G. Willoughby, Merton; G. H. de B. Wyllys, Wadham.

Class III.-J. L. Addjeshaw, Univ.; D. F. Appleby, Ch. Ch.; M. H. Barry, Hertford; R. H. G. Bonnycastle, Wadham; C. C. Bowie, Merton; J. M. Buckley, Magd.; D. E. Cameron, B.N.C.; J. P. Carleton, Magd.; R. M. Clapp, Merton; H. H. Cochrane, New Coll.; L. H. Collins, Trin.; C. P. Connell, New Coll.; R. L. Daniell, New Coll.; C. R. De Gruchy, Jesus; J. K. Donald, New Coll.; L. C. Dorman, Univ.; E. P. F. Eagan, New Coll.; R. H. Eggar, Univ.; E. J. W. Ellis, Trin.; D. B. Evans, Trin.; W. P. Forrest, Lincoln; G. W. G. Fox, Magd.; E. D. B. Hawksley, Univ.; R. I. Henty, New Coll.; E. O. Hills, Pemb.; G. R. Hodnett, Exeter; W. F. Hunt, Exeter; D. Johnston, B.N.C.; H. V. Lloyd-Jones, Jesus; R. J. S. Martin, Lincoln; J. L. Messenger, B.N.C.; R. S. Nicklin, Univ.; R. D. H. Osborne, Lincoln; L. V. Parker, Trin.; H. F. Parshall, New Coll.; H. W. Pritchard, Balliol; M. A. Rauf, Worc.; Ć. W. Reece, Jesus; A. H. B. Reynolds, Merton; T. W. S. Sharp, Non-Coll.; A. C. Sherwin, Pemb.; W. Spurlock, Exeter; E. de V. Stegmann, B.N.C.; G. L. Taylor, Merton; J. F. Tiernay, B.N.C.; D. B. H. Warner, Trin.; E. Weintal, Non-Coll.; C. V. Wight, Queen's.

Class IV.-A. Ahmed, Non-Coll.; R. Bagwell, B.N.C.; I. Calder, New Coll. ; W. Capstick, Pemb.; G. C. Downs-Butcher, Univ.; the Hon. R. Gathorne-Hardy, Ch. Ch.; E. C. Giddings, Wadham; S. A. Husain, St. Ed. Hall; C. H. Knott, B.N.C.; B. E. Nield, Magd.; J. E. Pedder, Worc.; T. M. Roberts, Wadham; F. P. Streeten, Trin.; R. B. Turnbull, Trin.; S. W. Washington, Hertf.; J. Watts, New Coll.; E. D. Wetton, B.N.C.; J. H. A. Yearslek, Queen's.

Egrotant.-J. M. Carey, Univ.; H. H. Hancock, Univ.

Overstanding, satisfied the examiners.-H. A. Bridges, Univ. ; H. S. Glendening, Merton; W. H. MacLean, B.N.C.; C. V. Schweizer, Magd.

Satisfied the Examiners.-C. Carrigan, Trin.; P. O. A. Davison, Magd.; N. W B. G. Harvey, Merton; A. C. Lierneux, New Coll. ; C. Mathew, Trin. ; C. H. Van Houten, B.N.C.

APPOINTMENTS

Information intended for publication under the above heading should reach us not later than Wednesday evening in each week, as publication is otherwise delayed.

Mr. ERNEST Charles MarTIN has been appointed to be Superintendent of County Courts, to succeed Mr. H. P. Boland, transferred to the Irish Free State.

Mr. EDWARD HOLLEY, solicitor, of Aylsham and Reepham, has been appointed to be clerk to the justices of the Eynsford Division (Norfolk) in succession to the late Mr. D'Arcy Collyer. Mr. Holley was admitted in 1895, and is a member of the firm of Messrs. Purdy and Holley, of Reepham, Norfolk.

NOTES AND QUERIES
QUERIES

8. PERCENTAGE OF INCOME ON UNAUTHORISED INVESTMENT.Trustees with directions to sell and realise, are carrying on the business of the testator. The widow, by the terms of the will, is entitled to the income of the estate for life. What rate of interest should the trustees pay the widow, upon the capital employed in

the business, pending the sale of the business, as it is considered that the widow should not receive the income from the business, which the trustees are not authorised to continue to carry on?

J. F. T. 9. CEMETERY EXTENSION.-Is an extension of a cemetery an extension of a churchyard within the meaning of the Consecration of Churchyards Act 1867 ? With regard to the fees to be charged on an extension of a cemetery. Under the table of fees fixed by the Convocation of Canterbury, April 27, 1894, it is provided that the fee on the consecration of an extension of a churchyard is not to exceed £3 3s., but there is no mention of extensions of cemeteries in the table. Can it be assumed that the words "extension of a churchyard cover extension of any burial place "? Authorities will oblige. A. B. C. 10. MORTGAGE DEBENTURE - RECEIVER. A. B. Company Limited mortgaged Blackacre (freehold) to X. to secure £20,000, and also gave X. a debenture charging all its property by way of collateral security. The mortgage and debenture provide for the power of sale and appointment of a receiver to become exercisable on certain instalments falling into arrear. The debenture provides that the receiver shall be the agent of the company and have power to sell the assets. X. is also the holder (through transfer) of a second debenture to secure £2000. There are several holders of third debentures. If default is made in paying the instalments, then (1) If X. appoints B. receiver under the first debenture and B. puts Blackacre up for sale by public auction, (a) can X. bid for and purchase the property; and (b) can X. and Y. bid and have it conveyed to them jointly? (2) If the property realises less than £22,000, are the third debenture holders necessary parties to the conveyance to X., X. and Y., or any other person, and can B. make a good title with the concurrence of X.? INOPINATUS.

11. CONVEYANCE-RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.-A builder owned land facing a main street. He built four houses and shops on the land in 1923, and sold number one to A., number two to B., and number three to C. Each conveyance contained a covenant "the purchaser for himself, his heirs and assigns by "the " with vendor" (the builder) not to carry on on the purchased premises, a grocer's business. The builder subsequently sold the fourth house to a grocer, informing him of the covenants in the conveyances of number one, two, and three. This grocer, after a short while, sold number four to X.-another grocer, who purchased on the representation that none of the adjoining shops, one, two, and three could be used as a grocer's shop. It will be observed that the original covenants in the conveyances of one, two, and three, were made with "the vendor" without more. No assignment of the benefit of these covenants (supposing them to be capable of assignment) was contained in the conveyance of number four, either to the original purchaser or the present owner. It is now proposed by one of the owners of one of the shops, one to three, to sell to a grocer with a view to his setting up in opposition to X. Can X. restrain the owner of any of numbers one, two, and three from carrying on a grocer's trade, or can he take any steps, by assignment of covenant or otherwise, to put himself into a position to do so?

ANSWERS

J. S. S.

(Q. 3.) CONVEYANCE-SALE BY PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE.— I should like to refer to the first part of this query again, to state why no reference was made to the recent case of Wise v. Whitburn (130 L. T. Rep. 655; (1924) 1 Ch. 460), in my reply. In that case there was a bequest of a leasehold house to two of the original executors of the testator's will upon trust to permit the testator's widow to occupy it during her life upon certain terms. After her death, those two executors attempted to sell the house, and it was held that they could not. They had assented to the bequest and the plaintiffs had actual notice of the assent. The facts given in the query are not on all fours, and I am not at all sure that the case applies. Hence, I did not cite it. Even if there was an implied assent by the original executor to the widow's occupation, as she is dead and the assenting executor is also dead, it seems to me doubtful whether the assent would extend to the beneficial interest of the brothers. G. O. S.

(Q. 6.) ADMINISTRATION-POWER OF SURETIES.-The sureties will be liable if the next-of-kin do not receive their shares of the

estate. Dobbs v. Brain (67 L. T. Rep. 371; (1892) 2 Q. B. 207.) I think the only course is to have guardians of the minors appointed, and they should then apply to the court under the Judicial Trustees Act 1896, s. 1, for the appointment of a judicial trustee to act jointly with the administratrix. (Re Ratcliff, 78 L. T. Rep. 834; (1898) 2 Ch. 352.) G. O. S.

CORRESPONDENCE

This department being open to free discussion on all Professional topics, the Editor does not hold himself responsible for any opinions or statements contained in it.

66

RENT AND MORTGAGE INTEREST RESTRICTIONS ACT 1923, s. 8, SUB-S. (2). In April last the Divisional Court heard three appeals from certain County Courts, the point being as to the meaning of the word "recoverable" under the above-mentioned sub-section, and the court held that proceedings taken within the six months the rein-mentioned would be in good time, and that it was not necessary to recover judgment " within such period. The three appeals referred to were taken together, and were: (1) Lewis v. McKay; (2) Clark v. Potter ; and (3) Algate v. Vulger. (157 L. T. Jour. 325). I know of two County Court judges (and there may be others) who have postponed their decisions in cases they have tried, pending supposed further appeals in the actions referred to. I acted for the appellant McKay in the first-mentioned case, and I am able, therefore, to state that there is no further appeal on his behalf, and I have ascertained from the respective solicitors representing one of the parties in the other two cases that there are no further appeals as regards the decision affecting them. In view of the postponement of the County Court judgments above referred to, I hope that this letter will be of some use to those concerned. J. LEWIS PHILLIPS.

[The decisions above referred to were in effect approved by the Court of Appeal in Diment v. Roberts on Wednesday last, a note of which will appear next week.-ED. L. T.]

OBITUARY

Mr. ROBERT HESELRIGE BUCKBY, solicitor, of Leicester, died recently at the age of sixty-seven years. Mr. Buckby was admitted in 1879 and practised in Leicester for more than forty years. He was a member of the Law Society.

Mr. D'ARCY BEDINGFELD COLLYER, solicitor, of Reepham, Norfolk, died there on the 10th inst. Mr. Collyer was the third son of the late Mr. John Collyer, of Hackford Hall, Reepham, County Court judge. He was admitted in 1874 and practised at Reepham, where he held the offices of Clerk to the Justices and to the Commissioner of Taxes. Mr. Collyer was extremely popular in the neighbourhood, and will be much regretted.

Mr. HYLTON JESSOP, solicitor, of Cheltenham, died there recently at the age of fifty-six years. Mr. Jessop was admitted in 1894 and was a member of the firm of Messrs. Jessop and Son. He was also a member of the Law Society, and well-known as a good golfer and cricketer.

Biggleswade

Thursday 14.

10.30

Tuesday 9.
Th 25 (if nec.)

Helston

Tuesday 19..

Wed 10 (R)
Wednesday17
Thursday 18.
Fri 19 (R)
Wed 24 (R).
Monday 29..
Tuesday 30.. 10
Wednesday 10 10
Thurs 11 (L). 10
Fr 12 (Adj.). 10
M 15 (Adj.).. 10
Tuesday 16.. 10
Wed 17 (JS). 10
Th 18 (B&E). 10
Fri 19 (L) ... 10
M 22 (Adj.).. 10
Tuesday 23.. 10
Wednesday24 10
Th 25 (L)
F 26 (Adj.).

Henley-on-Thames

Friday 1..

10.30 10

Chichester..

Hereford

Tuesday 12..

9.30

10

Hertford

Wednesday10 11

Chippenham

Chipping Norton

Tuesday 12..

Tuesday 30.. Thursday 18.

10.15 10

Hexham& Bell'gham High Wycombe

9.45

Hinckley

Thursday 7..

Hitchin

Holbeach

Holsworthy

Holt.

Honiton

Monday 8... 10.30

10.30 Thursday 25. 10.15 9.30 Wednesday 10 10.30 Thursday 11. Tuesday 16.. 11 11

M 29 (Adj.).. 10

Conway

Tuesday 30.. 10

Corwen

Tuesday 23.. 12.30

Mon 11 (RB) Tuesday 12

2.45

Hungerford

9.30

Huntingdon

Wednesday13

11

Hyde

Hythe

Thursday 7.. Friday 15.

Crewkerne

Monday 15. Wednesday17 10 Friday 12... 10.30

11

Ilford.

Ilkeston Ipswich

Tuesday 5.

Wednesday 6

Wednesday 6

Thursday 21.

9.30 9.30

Friday 8.

Friday 26 (R) 11.15 10.30

Thursday 18. Friday 19... Monday 29. Monday 22

Thursday 11. 10.30 Friday 12... 10.30 Tuesday 30.. 10 Wednesday17 10 Thursday 18. 10 Friday 19... 10

12.30 10 10

Kington

10

10.30

10.30

10

9

Monday 22. 11

Wednesday24 10

10.30

Th 7 (RB)..

Th 4 (RB) Tuesday 30..

Kirkham

Friday 12... 9.45

Knighton

Monday 11.. Friday 8..

10

10

Diss Dolgelly Doncaster

Monday 22..

Tuesday 19.

10

Wednesday 20

Dorchester

Dover

Friday 1. Wednesday 6 Friday 1... Wednesday20

Fri 8 (R,9.30)

10

Downham

Thursday 11. 10.30

Monday 11.. Th 21 (R)

10

Thursday 25. 11 10.30

Dudley

Friday 1 (JS) †

Langport

Tuesday 19..

10.15 10.15

Launceston.

Ledbury

Dursley

Leeds.

Friday 15.

Tuesday 19.. † Friday 8 (R).

Monday 22.. 10.30 Th 25 (& R). 10.30 Monday 29.. 10.30 .Tu 30 (& R). 10.30 †

10 Tuesday 9... 10 Wednesday 10 10 Tuesday 23.. 11.45

Leek Leicester

Saturday 9.. Monday 11.. Tuesday 12.. Saturday 16. Saturday 9..

Friday 19... 10 Thursday 11. 10 Wednesday17 11 Monday 29.. 10

Tu 12 (RB).. Tu 2 (RB)... 11
Tu 23 (RB).. 11
Wednesday24 10.15
Thursday 25. 10.15
F 26 (JS&AO). 10.15
Monday 8... 10

Fri 15 (RB)..
Tuesday 19

(JS&AO).. Wed 20(B&G)

10.30

10.30

10.30

10.30

10.30

10.30

10