a was a were an a risk that a certain magazine (the principal interest of the business) was insufficient to pay them; but if exercised then there was a might fail to be published. The banking account showed a credit sufficient margin after paying debts and funeral and testamentary of a few shillings only, and the general partner was largely indebted expenses and the legacies bequeathed. Mr. Justice Warrington to the firm. Mr. Justice Swinfen Eady has held that under such has held that the execution of a will containing no residuary bequest circumstances, the general partner, moreover, refusing to sign the of personalty, but merely the appointment of executors and bequests annual general account whereby drawings in respect of profits would of general legacies, will, where the donee's estate is thus insufficient, be repayable, the limited partner was entitled to a winding-up order. operato as an execution of the power to the extent of the sum PATENT cases have been fairly numerous, and some important necessary to enable both debts and the legacies to be paid by tho decisions have been arrived at. Rë Fiat Votors Limited's Application aid of the property of the donee of the power. (103 L. T. Rep. 453 ; (1911) 1 Ch. 66) turned on the Patents and PRINCIPAL AND AGENT cases may next receive our notice. In Designs Act 1907, s. 25, in regard to revocation on the ground that Kinahan and Co. Limited v. Parry (103 L. T. Rep. 867; (1911) 1 an article is manufactured mainly outside the United Kingdom. K. B. 459) the defendants were hotel owners, and they appointed The articles in question here were mainly made abroad, and a manager. The latter held the licence, and his name was painted it was shown that there limited manufacture in over the door. The defendants instructed hini to buy his spirits this country by the patentees or their licensees. It was also from a certain firm, but, instead of conforming vith this order, he shown that infringers of the patents making ordered them from the plaintiffs. The latter knew nothing of the extensive trade by manufacturing in the United Kingdom, and, if this had to be taken into account, it would then be special instructions given to the defendant, and afforded him credit. At a later date the plaintiffs sued the defendants for the price of tho difficult for the applicants to discharge the onus of showing that spirits on learning that they were the owners. It was held by the the patented articles were manufactured mainly outside this country. Divisional Court (Justices Pickford and Coleridge) that the The comptroller was of opinion that the patentees could rely on the infringing manufacture." Mr. Justice Parker now holds that the plaintiffs could maintain this action as there was no presumption in such a case that a licensee was a mere manager with limited comptroller ought not to concern himself with the question whether authority and tied. The Court of Appeal has during the past year what has been done abroad has been done with or without the reversed this decision, and by so doing throws some balance in consent of the patentee. So the comptroller need not inquire the scales in which certain decisions of weight have produced an whether what has been done in England is or is not in derogation equilibrium. It seems a rather different case to one where the of the rights of the patentee, and should not exclude from his com- proprietor and not the manager was the licensee. The mere fact putation what has been done in derogation of such rights. The that the licensee-manager's name appeared on the door rather threw following important dicta should be noted : “Further than this, it dust into the eyes, and would not lead persons to suppose that he was seems to me impossible that the Legislature should have contem- not the proprietor or subject to limitations of authority. Bath v. plated an inquiry so far-reaching as to embrace the rights Standard Land Company Limited (104 L. T. Rep. 867; (1911) 1 Ch. inter se of the patentee and everybody in the United Kingdom who 618) was a case where a company empowered the plaintiff to manage is manufacturing the article or carrying on the process the subject of certain real estates, and employed one of its directors to act as a his patent. One man may be manufacturing the article or carrying solicitor. His profit costs were paid. Another director acted as an on the process because he believes the patent is invalid ; another, estate agent for the company at a salary, another as auctioneer, because he maintains that on the construction of certain correspond- and there was also a secretary, who, for acting as chartered accountant ence between himself and the patentee he has a free licence; a and keeping the books, obtained a larger salary. The Court third, because he contends that in equity the patent belongs to him ; of Appeal held that the company on the agreement with the and yet a fourth because he thinks that in an action for infringe. plaintiff could not make any charge in respect of keeping the ment he will have a defence under sect. 25 of the Act.' The learned accounts, and, by a majority, it was held that the directors stood judge thought, therefore, such questions do not concern the comp- in a fiduciary relation to the company, but not to the plaintiff, and troller at all. The question is left open whether sect. 27 (2) does that the profit costs, salary, and commission paid to the directors not render lawful everything done while the patent is revocable, in their professional capacity could be allowed in taking the accounts although it would otherwise be an infringement. The learned judge between the plaintiff and the company. Lord Justice Fletcher thought this “quite arguable.” The same learned judge in Re Moulton laid down the rule that where a limited company undertakes Green's Application (104 L. T. Rep. 629 ; (1911) 1 Ch. 574) held that, the administration of a trust, the directors as individuals are not in considering whether a patent should be revoked under sect. 27 (1) in the position of ordinary agents, and are liable for matters of on the ground of manufacture being mainly outside the United personal conduct inconsistent with their full knowledge of the Kingdom, the court is not called upon to determine that there was fiduciary character of the duties carried out by them in the coma manufacture of the patented article or a carrying on of the pany's name. patented process at the precise moment when the petition is lodged. One most important case on the law relating to PROMISSORY NOTES Nor will some temporary cessation of manufacture and a sale of should be duly noted up. Talbot v. l'on Boris and Wife (104 L. T. stock in the meantime prevent sub-sect. 1 from coming into effect, but where manufacture and business are permanently stopped the Rep. 524; (1911) 1 K. B. 854) turned on the construction of the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, s. 30 (2). The female defendant signed section will not apply merely because the remaining stock is sold certain notes then in action, but she asserted that she did so under after the business has come to an end. duress of her husband. The evidence established this, and the jury We now pass to the very different class of case which crops up in found that the notes were signed under this pressure, and the question connection with the equitable doctrines relating to POWERS OF before the Court of Appeal was whether the plaintiff, the holder APPOINTMENT. We may cite Cloutte v. Storey (103 L. T. Rep. 617; of the notes, was under the onus of showing that value was given (1911) 1 Ch. 18). The question before the Court of Appeal was whether by him in good faith. The plaintiff was not called at all as a certain appointments were in fraud of the power or whether they witness, and consequently gave no evidence to rebut the female were valid. The evidence proved that they were niade in the interest defendant's allegation that he knew of the pressure brought to and for the benefit of a father and mother, and were frauds on the bear on her. It was held that the onus of proof with regard to the power. It was held that an appointment in fraud of an equitable plaintiff's knowledge of duress rested on the defendant and was power, not so acting as to pass the legal estate, ís void, and a not shifted by sect. 30 (2), and therefore the plaintiff succeeded, purchaser for value without notice can only rely on such equitablo and the sub-section is not to be applied to any case where the holder defences as are open to purchasers without the legal title who are who is seeking to enforce a negotiable instrument is the person to subsequent in time against prior equitable titles. An appointment whom that instrument was delivered in the first place and in whose under a common law power, or a power operating under the Statute possession it still remains. of Uses, by which the legal estate has passed, is at most only (To be continued.) voidable, and a purchaser for value with the legal estate and without notice is not affected by the fraudulent execution of the power. It was further considered what the effect was of a certain compromiso in a Chancery action which affected the settlement. Lord Justice Farwell said that it was not in accordance with principle or IRISH NOTES. authority to construe deeds of compromise as regards certain speci. fied questions so as to deprive any party of any right not then in The question of civil business at the winter assizes came before the dispute and not in contemplation by any of the parties to such deed. Belfast Chamber of Commerce last week, when & resolution was Therefore persons claiming in default of appointment were not pre- moved requesting one of the committees of that body to take such action cluded from proceedings to secure the setting aside of a fraudulent as might be necessary “ with a view to the restoration of the civil appointment by their having executed a deed of compromise con- side of the business at the Ulster Winter Assizes.” It was pointed cerned with matters not then dirertly in issue. Re Seabrook; Gray out tbat great inconvenience was caused to the city of Belfast owing to v. Baddeley (103 L. T. Rep. 587; (1911) 1 Ch. 151) turned on sect. 27 no civil business being disposed of at the winter assizes, and one of the of the Wills Act 1837, dealing with general bequests operating as speakers, according to a report in the newspapers, gave the following exercises of powers of appointment, unless a contrary intention shall explanation of wby the judges bad ceased disposing of civil business he manifested. In this case a general power of appointment had at that aesize: “ It appeared that when the judges went on circuit been given to S. M. S., and the latter, after making certain specific they were allowed a fixed som for expenses. The judge who heard the levises, directed that the remainder of her property in houses and oivil business on the last occasion prior to its suspension was detained lands should be divided among her nephews. She concluded her some time owing to the amount of business, and was therefore at the will by appointing executors, but included in its provisions no expense of extra lodging. He applied to the Treasury for the extra residuary gift of personalty. The question was whether such a allowapoe, which was refused. The result was that the judges will operated as the execution of a power of appointment over a throatened sometbing like a strike. The Privy Counoil at their next one-third share of the proceeds of sale of the estate of the donor meeting struck off the bearing of civil bills at the winter assizes." of the power. It is very material to note that if the power was If this is the correot explanation of the matter, it certainly reflects not to be deemed to he exercised the personal estate of S. M. S. do ofedit on those who are copoerned, An interesting discussion took place at the recent Public Health Congress in Dublin with reference to the duties of municipal bodies as regards the Sale of Food and Drugs Acts, and Mr. M. C. Maoineroey. K.C., one of the Divisional Police Justices of Dublin, gave his experiences with reference to the administration of those Acts. It was urged that (in Dublin particularly) greater precautions should be taken than are taken at present with reference to the sale of fish and vegetables-articles whiob are highly perishable and highly dangerous to health unsound. Mr. T. W. Russell, Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture, gave some startling instances of the administration of these Aote by magistrates in some of the counties. He said that in County Clare a bench of magistrates bad imposed a fino of only one penny upon some persons who had watered milk to the extent of 32 per cent. Io Dublin, a butter vendor, who had been persistently selling margarine for Irish creamery bntter to a gentleman in County Clare, was found guilty by a jury, and the judge, instead of sending the vendor to gaol, fined him £50. The prisoner put his hand in his pocket and paid the £50 at once. Mr. Russell added that his conviction was that until magistratee, in the interests of the poor, dealt severely with offences of this stamp, these nefarious practices would go on. as follows: That workers attaining the age of fifty should be permitted to contract out of the Act; that serious and willul misconduot should be a bar to all claims; that when an operation is desirablo and medically recommended, weekly payments sbould coale until it is permitted ; that a medical officer should sit with the County Court juage on the demand of either party ; that discretion should be given to the judge to require seourity for costs; that there should be an amendment of the Act in regard to appeals; that in cases of accident on board ship similar notice should be given by the workmen as in ordinary cabe8 ; that in the case of lump-sum settlements some arrangement for spreading the payments over the period, to prevent risk of loss or the squandering of the whole amount of the grant, should be made; that the rules should be altered with the object of hastening proceedings for review or the rebearing of awards; that in medical cases listed for review, power should be given to the court registrar to deal with the same assisted by a medical referee; and that there should be some provision against malip gering. COMMENTS ON CASES. The first prosecution under the Weeds and Agricultural Seeds (Ireland) Act 1909 came before a bench of Tipperary magistrates on tbe 29th ult. That Act provides that the Department of Agriculture may, with the consent of the council of any county, make an order declaring that throughout the county all plants of any species to wbich the section applies are noxious weeds for the purposes of the Act. The species of plants to which the section applies are ragwort, charlock, coltsfoot, thistle, and dock. Orders have been made by the department with referenoe to a considerable number of counties in Ireland. Then sect. 2 provides that where the department are satisfied that there are nozious weeds growing upon any land, they may serve a notice upon the occupier of the land requiring him to cut down and destroy those weeds in the mapper and within the time specified in the notice. If the occupier makes default, it is provided that he shall be guilty of an offence under the Act. It was under this section that the proaccution took place, and it was stated that a number of other prosecutions were about to take place for similar offences. It is clear that the department are determined to put the Act into force. The obairman of the magistrates said that the feeling of the court was that as this was the first case under the Act they would only ipfiot a fine of 10s. The Irish Government has had under consideration the question of the committal of ohildren to industrial schools for non-compliance with attendanoe orders. The matter bas arisen in County Down, and, in answer to a complaint from Mr. Mao Veagh, M.P., the Chief Secretary pointed out the view of the law that is taken by the Irish law officers. It appears that a summons was taken out under beot. 4 of the Irish Eduoation Act 1892 in respect of the non-compliance with a certain attendanoo order. The magistrates refused to commit the children to industrial schools as the case had not been brought before the court for that purpose. The Chief Secretary said that he has been advised that this view of the law is inoorrect. A summons under seot. 4 can only be an application for an attendance order or for the imposition of a fine for non-compliance with one; but under sect. 133 (20) of the Children Act 1908 the magistrates may, if they think fit, instead of imposing a fine, send a child to an industrial school. It seems to be for the magistrates of their own motion to substitute the industrial Bobool for the fine, but the Chief Secretary said that before making guch an order it appeared to be desirable that the county council should get an opportunity of being beard, and for that purpose tbe • bearing of the summons might be adjourned. Sect. 133 (20) of the Act of 1908 provides as follows : " For the provisions of this Act relating to an enforcement of an attendance order the following pro. vision shall be substituted : 'A court of summary jurisdiction constituted in accordance with the provisions of the Irish Education Aot 1908 may, if it thinks fit, on complaint of a school attendance committee made under sect. 4 of that Act for the purpose of enforcing an attendance order, order a child to be sent to a certified day industrial school, or, if it appears to the court tbat there is no Buch school suitable for the child, to a certified industrial sobool, either in addition to or without ipflicting any fine under that section.' FaR REACHING in its importance is the decision of the Court of Appeal in the recent case of Bath v. Standard Land Company Limited (104 L. T. Rep. 867), but thero is one everyday transaction in the building society world to whioh it has very particular application. When, in consequence of the default of a borrower from such a society, it is constrained to exercise its power as mortgagee to appoint a receiver of the rents of the mortgaged property, it is by no means Uncommon to permit cne of the members of the board of directors to act in that capacity. Until the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Ireland in Kavanagh v. Workingman's Benefit Building Society (1896, 1 Ir. Rep. 56), it was generally supposed that the fact that the receiver was an officer of the society did not debar him from obarging the ugual commission on the gross amount of all money received by him, as his remuneration for go acting. But the decision in that cato being what it was, considerable doubt has since been entertained as to the propriety of tbe practice to make that charge in the absence of an express stipulation for it. It has become, therefore, pot un ugual to insert in the clause in the mortgage deed authorising the appoint. ment of a receiver, or in provisions supplemental to the statutory power, words to the effect that the person appointed to collect and receive the rents of the mortgaged property eball be entitled to a commission, “notwithstanding that he may be an officer of the society.' The strong observations of the learned judges who decided Kavanagh's case (ubi sup.) certainly rendered the doubt that arose on this point not without foundation, even though the decision was not binding upon the courts in this country. The feeling, however, was that the tendency would be to adopt what had been laid down by the Irish Court of Appeal-namely, that a receiver who was a direotor of a mortgagee society could not make a profit for himselt in the shape of remuneration for collecting the rents of the mortgaged property. This was considered by the Irish court to be an applica. tion of the doctrine of Nicholson v. Tulin (3 K. & J. 159; 3 Jur. N. 8. 235). In that case & mortgagor conveyed all his real and personal estate to the mortgagees in trust for creditore. It was held by Vice-Chancellor Page Wood that one of the mortgagees was not entitled to a commission on tbe rents received by him under an appointment as receiver by himself and bis co-trustees. In Kavanagh's case (ubi sup.), Lord Ashbourne thought that the ground for disallowing the commission was because the director might have voted for his own appointment; while Lord Justice Fitzgibbon, with whom Lord Justioe Walker substantially agreed, gave as the reason the inconsisteooy between the director's duty and interest. In Bath's CABE (ubi sup.), which came before Mr. Justice Neville in the court of first instance, bis Lordship observed that the reasoning of the learned judges in the Irish case commended itself to his mind, and accordingly he applied their decision in giving bis judgment. To two of ibe learned judges of the Court of Appeal-the Master of the Rolls and Lord Justice Buckley-on the other hand, the reasoning of the Irish court seemed to be fallacious, and the decision not right in prinoiple. “The conflict between interest and duty,” said the Master of the Rolls, ""only arises where a fiduciary relation exists between the parties.” The directors of a building society do not stand in a fiduciary relation to a person who, having borrowed money from it, mortgages his property to seoure the advance. Although tbey stand in a fiduciary relation, and owe a duty to the society, their position is not the same in regard to the mortgagor. For, ag appears from Re Wincham Shipbuilding and Boiler and Salt Company; Pocle, Jackson, and Whyte’s case (38 L. T. Rep. 659; 9 Ch. Div. 322), tbe direotors are only trustees for the shareholders of a building society of whom a mortgagor to it would be one-in a qualified sense. Lord Justice Fletcher Moulton in delivering his judgment dissented from the majority on the question whether in Bath's case (ubi sup.) the directors of the company stood in a fiduciary relation to the plaintiff , And apparently his Lordship, like Mr. Justice Neville, regarded Kavanagh's case (ubi sup.) as an authority for the opinion which be expressed. So far, however, there is a clear decision of the Court of Appeal that no such relation existed, and an equally clear disapproval of the decision in Kavanagh's case (ubi sup.). The charging of a commission under circumstances similar to those of that cage is consequently not now illegal in this country, whatever it may be in Ireland. All tbe same, the retention, ex abundanti cautela, of words stipulating for the charge may not be inexpedient in the face of such Two matters of considerable legal interest were discussed last week at a meeting in Dublin of the Association of Chambers of Commerce. The first was the question of the Irish law of bankruptoy, and a resolution was passed to the effect tbat that law is, from the point of view of the business commuoity, in an unsatiefactory condition. For a long timo the Irish Chambers of Commerce have been calling upon the Government to bring the Irish bankruptoy law into consonance with the English bankruptcy law, the last amendment to that law in Ireland having been made by the Aot of 1872. It is alleged that the amendment of the latter has been blocked by the Legal Profession, who believe that it is very doubtrul if the system obtaining in England is so very much superior to that in Ireland. It appears that a Viceregal Commission of Inquiry was promised, but it was delayed in order that the report of the Departmental Committee on the Bankruptoy Laws in England might first be published. Taat report was published in 1909, but nothing has been done in Ireland since that time. The second matter that was disouseed was the amendment of the Work. men's Compensation Act 1906. Some of the suggested amendments were 19 190. a marked oonflict of judicial opinion as there is. For it, as was said the said schedule and the short result of sugh notices or observations 25. AND WHEREAS the said F. X. died at on the day of 191 26. AND WHEREAS doubts have arisen as to whether the said THE CONVEYANCER. annuity of £ bequeathed to the said F. X. during the life of his said father continued after the said F. X. and the said N. N. has been advised by counsel that it did so continue during the life of MISCELLANEOUS PRECEDENTS (continued). such father. 27. AND WHEREAS by an indenture dated the day of of the one part and the said Q. R. As lo the Appointment of new Trustees of the said Will. and 8. T. of the other part in consideration of the sum of £ 13. AND WHEREAS the said M. T. died on the day of paid by the eaid Q. R. and S.T. to the estate trustees the estate 188 and the said B. T. died on the day of trustees assigned and released to the said Q. R. and 8. T. all the 189 estate interest property and promises comprised in and assigned by 14. AND WHEREAS by an indenture dated the the said inden ture of the day of 190 TO HOLD tho day of 189 and made between the said H. X. of the one part and W. J. Bame unto the said Q. R.and 8. T. disobarged from the said indenture of of the other part the said W. J. was duly appointed by the said the 190 and from all principal moneys and H. X. to be trustee of the said will in the place of the said B. T. interest thereby secured. and M. T. and jointly with the said H. X. and by virtue of the 28. AND WHEREAS notwithstanding the facts appearing by the said indentare now in reoital or otherwise the trust funds and property first schedule bereto the said N. N. at the request of the said parties which were then subjeot to the trusts of the said will were duly hereto of the first fifteen parte has determined to distribute the share vested in the said H. X. and W. J. of the said F. X. in the resid very estate of the said testator in 15. AND WHEREAS the said W.J. died on the day of manner hereinafter appearing upon having such release and indemnity as are hereinafter contained. 16. AND WHEREAS by an indenture dated the day of A8 to the Family of the said E. X. 190 and made between the said H. X. of the one part and the said 29. AND WHEREAS the said E. X. had nine children and no more N. N. of the other part the said N. N. was duly appointed by the said H. X. to be trustee of the said will in the place of the said namely (1) the said J. X. (2) the said F. X. (3) the said E. X. junior W. J. and jointly with the said H. Y. and under and by virtue of (4) the said A. A. (5) the said B. B. (6) the said C. C. (7) the said the in denture now in recital or otherwise the trust funds and D. D. (8) L. X. and (9) H. F. As to the share of the said J. X. 30. AND WHEREAS by an indenture dated the day of As to the Family of the said X. Junior. 189 and made between the said J. X. of the one part and H. I. of 17. AND WHEREAS the eaid X. junior had sevən ohildren and no more the other part the said J. X. charged all his interest arising under or pamely (1) R. X. who died on the by virtue of the said will in favour of the said 8.1. 190 having 189 and made between the said H. I. of the one part and L. B. of died on tb day of 190 having had three children the other part for the valuable consideration therein mentioned the coly namely the said parties hereto of the second part and one child said H. 1. assigned all the interest of the said J. X. arising under or who died in early ipfancy (3) the said I. J. (4) the said K. L. (5) the by virtue of the said will to the said L. B. said M. N. and (6) the said O. P. 32. AND WHEREAS after an intermediate assignment in favour of 18. AND WHEREAS the said X. junior bad one other child namely A. T. ultimately by an indenture dated the day of W. A. (the wile of F. A.) who died on the day of 190 and made between the eaid A. T. of the one part and K. T. of 18 without having had issue. the other part all the share and interest of the said J. X. under the As to the Share of the said T. X. said will in reversion expectant on the decease of the said H. X. of 19. AND WHEREAS the said T. X. has had one child only namely and in the residuary estale of the said testator was assigned unto the said K. T. absolutely. F. X. 33. AND WHEREAS by an indenture dated the day of 20. AND WHEREAS an interim order in bankruptoy of the High 190 and made between the said K. T. of the one part and B. J. Court of Justice was made against the said F. X. dated the T. E. and T. H. of the other part all the share and interest day of 188 and on the day of 188 he was duly comprised in the said indenture of the day of 190 adjudicated & bankrupt and on or about the day of 188 Y. T. was duly appointed trustee of the estate and effects of was assigned by the said K. T. unto the eaid B. J. T. E. and T. H. by way of mortgage for separing the principal moneys with interest the said F. X. and on the day of 188 the said therein referred to. appointment was duly certified by the Board of Trade. 34. AND WHEREAS by an indenture da ted the day of Rever- other part all the shares and interests whether vested presumptive or contingent and as well original as accruing to which the said J. X. was then or should or might thereafter bo entitled under the said the third part the said F. X. of the fourth part and the estate trustees will in roversion expectant on the decease of the said H. X. of and in of the Life Assurance Society of the fifth part the said the residuary estate of the said testator and the investments of annuity of £ bequeathed to the said F. X. during the life which the same consisted were assigned by the said K. T. unto the of his eaid father beoame vested in the Life Assurance said L. B. by way of mortgage for securing the principal sum of £g Sooiecy. and interest but subject to the said indenture of mortgage of the 22. AND WHEREAS by an iodonture dated the day of day of 189 and made between the said Y. T. of the ono part and the 35. AND WHEREAS the trustees or trustee for the time being of the said Q. R. and 8. T. of the other part for the valuable consideration therein mentioned the said Y. T. conveyed all the interest of every said will from time to time received notice of tho various mortgages kind of the said Y. T. as trustee of the said F. X. whether in charges on and dealings with tho share of the said J. X. in the residuary estate of the said testator montioned in the first column of possession roversion remainder or expectancy (and whether original the second schedule hereto and the said trustees or trustee have given or acorujing) of and under the said will of the said X. and in his real or caused to be given the notices mentioned in the second column of and residuary personal estate and the investments for the time being the same schedule and the short result of suoh notices or observations representing the same unto the said Q. R, and 8. T. . thereon are mentioned in the third column of the same echedule. 23. AND WHEREAS by an indenture dated the day of 190 and made beiween the said Q. R. and 8. T. of the one 36. AND WHEREAS by an indepture dated the day of 190 end made between and the said K. T. of the other Life Assurance part in consideration of (the said B. J. T. E. and T. H. assigned estate trastees all the estate and interest of the said Y. T. a8 trustee and released to the said K. share T. all the in bankruptoy of the said F. X of and in the residuary real and interest and promises assigned by the said indenture of the personal estate of the said testator held under the trusts of the said day of To HOLD the same unto the said K. T. will to which the said Q. R. and 8. T. as assignees of the said Y. T. discharged from the said indenture of the day of were entitled in reversion expectant on the death of the said H. X. 190 and from all principal moneys and interest thereby secured, 191 AND WHEREAS by an indenture dated the way and made between the said L. B. of the one part and the said K.T. of the other part in consideration of the sum of £ paid by the 24. AND WHEREAS the trustee or trustees for the time being of the said K. T. to the said L. B. the said L. B. assigned and released to said will have from time to time received notice of the various other the said K. T. the shares interest property and premises comprised charges on and dealing with the share of the said F. X. in the in and assigned by tbe said indenture of the day of residuary estate of the said testator mentioned in the first column of 190 TO HOLD the same unto the said K. T. digobargod from the the first schedule hereto and the said trustees or trustee bave given said indenture of the 190 and from all principal or caused to be given the notices mentioned in the second column of moneys and interest thereby segured. 190. 190 day of 3/ day of respectively acknowledge) and has paid one-bait of a like sum of £ to each of them the said parties hereto of the second part and bag transferred to them dovon of the said debentures (as they do hereby respeotively acknowledge) and has paid a like sum of £ to the said party bereto of the third part and has transferred to bim seven of the said debentures (as he doth hereby acknowledge) and has paid a like sum of £ to the said party hereto of the fourth part and bas transferred to her seven of the said debentures (as she doth hereby acknowledge) and bag paid tho like sum of £ to the said party bereto of the filth part and has transferred to her seven of the said debentures (88 sbe doth bere by acknowledge) and bas paid a like sum of £ to the said party hereto of the sixth part and has transferred to bim geven of the said debentures (as be doth hereby acknowledge) and has paid the like sum of £ to the parties hereto of the seventh part and has transferred to them seven of the said debentures (as they do hereby respectively acknowledge) and has paid a like sum of £ to the said party hereto of the eighth part and bas transferred to him seven of the said debentures (as he doth hereby acknowledge) and has paid a like sum of £ to the said party hereto of the ninth part and has transferred to him seven of the said debentures (as he doth hereby acknowledge) and has paid a like sum of £ to the said party bereto of the tenth part and has transferred to bim seven of tho said debentures (as he doth hereby acknowledge) and has paid a liko sum of £ to the said party hereto of the eleventh part and has transferred to her seven of the said debentures (as she doth hereby acknowledge) and bas paid & like sum of £ to the said party hereto of the twelftb part and bas transferred to ber seven of the said debentures (as she doth bereby acknowledge) and has paid a like sum of £ to the said party hereto of the thirteenth part and has transferred to her seven of the said debentures (as she doth hereby acknowledge) and has paid a like sum of £ to the party bereto of the fourteenth part and has transferred to him seven of the said debentures (as he doth hereby acknowledge) and has subdivided a like sum of £ into geven equal parts of £ each and has paid one of such sums of £ to each of the said persons parties hereto of the fifteenth part except the said M. M. agd has transferred to each of such persons (except the said M. M.) one of the said debentures (as they do hereby respectively acknowledge) and has retained the remaining Bum of £ and one of the said debentures upon the trusts applicable to the contingent share of the said M. M. and has retained the remaining sum of £ and the remaining saven of the said debentures in trust for the said T. X. or his assigos as the case ou the may be. 37. AND WHEREAS notwithstanding the facts appearing by the said second sobedule bereto the said N. N. at the request of the said parties bereto of the first fifteen parts has determined to distribute the share of the said J. X. in the residuary estate of the said testator in mapper hereinafter appearing upon having such release and indemnity as are hereinafter contained. As to the Share of the said L. X. 38. AND WHEREAS the said L. X. is still living and resides in 39. AND WHEREAS on or about the day of 189 the said H. X. received a letter of which the following is a copy from one G. : Dear Sir,-Re X.'s estate.--I beg to give you notice thatT.X., grandson of the testator, has sold to me bis joterest in this estate.-Yours, G. 40. AND WHEREAS the said L. X. referred to in the said letter is the said L, X. 41. AND WHEREAS the said L. X. denies that he sold his interest in the estate of the said testator to the said G. or that be ever had any dealings with him with reference to such interest. 42. AND WHEREAS inquiries have been made both by the said L. X. and the said N. N. for the said G. but at present they have been unable to discover bim or his address but the said notice of the day of 189 has not been withdrawn or been proved wortbless and until one of those things has been done the said N. N. bas refused to distribute the share of the said L. X. except under the direction of the court. As to the Share of the said H. H, X. 43. AND WHEREAS the said H. H. X. died on the day of 189 leaving children him surviving (1) the said E. E. (2) the said F. F. (3) tho said G. G. (4) the said 1. 1. (5) the Faid K. K. (6) the said L. L. and (7) the said M. M. who was born day of 189 Generally. 44. AND WHEREAS the income of the residuary estate of the said testator after payment thereout of the appuities and other current outgoings payable thereout was duly paid to the said I. X. during bis life and the apportioned part of such income down to the day of bia death has been paid to the persons entitled thereto. 45. AND WHEREAS the dealings of the trustees or trustee for the time being of the said will with the said residuary lund of £ down to the death of the said H. X. appear by part 2 of the said account. 46. AND WHEREAS at or about the time of the death of the said H. X. the residuary estate of the said testator consisted of the particulars set forth in the left-hand column of Part 3 of the said account amounting to £ 47. AND WHEREAS since ibe death of the said H. X. the said N.N. has out of the said residuary estate paid the sum of £ for the purchase of £ Two and a Half por Cent. Consols to provide for the said annuities of £ each payable to the said T. X. aod the Assurance Company (89 aseigos of the said R. X.) and the said legaoy of Ly payable on the death of the said T. x. and the said N. N. has out of the said residuary estato also paid a liko eum of £ for the purchase of another sum of £ Two and a Half per Cent. Consols to provide for the said annuity of £ payable to the said E. X. junior and the legacies a mounting to £ payable on his death and he bas also made tbe other payments appearing in the right-band column of Part 3 of the said account. 48. AND WHEREAS part of the said residuary estate consisted of tirst debentures of £ each of the a Company Limited. 49. AND WHEREAS there is no outside market for the said deben. tures and it would be impracticable to realise the same except at a great sacrifice and the said parties hereto of the first sixteen parts have accordingly agreed to take over of the said debeutores in specie in equal shares the remaining two of such debentures being Bold for convenience of division. 50. AND WHEREAS no settlement was made on the marriage of any of the married women parties hereto. 51. AND WHEREAS it is apprehended and tho said parties hereto of the first fifteen parts have agreed that the residuery estate of the said testator ig divisible in equal sixteenth shares between the said parties hereto of the first fifteen parts and the said T. X. or bis assigne. 52. AND WHEREAS the pet residuary estate of the said testator after making the payments thereout mentioned in the right-hand column of Part 3 of the said account amounts to tbe sum of £ in cash and £ of the said debentures of the Company Limited. 53. AND WHEREAS the said acoount has been delivered to the said parties bereto of the first fifteen parts and has been perused by them respectively and they are satisfied with such account as they do boreby respectively deolare. 54. AND WHEREAS the said N. N. hai divided the said sum of £ into sixteen equul parts of £ each and has divided the said debentures into sixteen equal parts of seven debentures each and has paid one-hall of one of such sums of £ to each of tbem the said persons parties hereto of the first part and has trang. ferred to them seved of the said debentures (18 they do hereby 55. AND WHEREAS the said parties hereto of the first fifteen parts being perfeotly satisfied with the application disposition retention payment and transfer of the said residuary estate hereja before recited to have been made and that such payment and transfer are in full satisfaction of their respective shares and interests in the said residuary estate and the proceeds of the sale calling in and conversion thereof and the income thereof (except as hereinafter provided) have agreed to execute suoh release and indemnity as are hereinafter contained. 56. AND WHEREAS the name of the said M. M. bas been inserted as one of the parties to these presents of the fifteenth part to the intent that he may if he shall think fit execute the same on his attaining his majority but the effeot of the exeoution of these presents by the suid adult parties hereto or any of them as bioding each such respective parties shall not in any way be prejudiced by the nonexecution of tbese presents by the said infant or by any other person herein named as a party to these presents. 57. Now THIS INDENTURE WITNESSETH that in pursuance of the said agreement and in consideration of the premises the said persons parties bereto of the first fifteen parte do and each and every of them doth boreby release and discharge the said N. N. bis boire executors and administratore and the estate and effects of the said B.T. M. T. W. J. and H. X. respectively deceased from the residuary estate of the said testator and the moneys arising from the sale conversion and getting in of the same or the income thereof and from all actions proceedings accounts claims and demands in respeot thereof or for or in respect of any sale investment payment act or thiog made done or executed or neglected or omitted by the said N. N. or the said B. T. M. T. W.J. and H. X. or any of them in the administration of the estate of the said testator or the execution of the trusts of the said will or for or in respect of any other thing in anywise relating to the premises. PROVIDED ALWAYS that the release Lerein before contained shall not extend to the respective sums of £ Two and a Half por Cent. Console so set apart as aforesaid nor to the said sum of £ and the said one debenture retained by the said N. N. upoo the trusts affecting the contingent share of the said M. M. or the income thereof. 58. AND THIS INDENTURE ALSO WITNESSETH that in pursuance of the said agreement and in consideration of the premises the said persons parties hereto of the first fifteen parts do hereby jointly and beverally covenant with the said N. N. his heirs executore and administratore that they the said covenanting parties and every of them their and every of their heri executors and administrators will at all times hereafter indemnity the said N, N. his heirs executors and administrators and the estates and effects of the said B. T. M. T. W. J. and H. X. respectively deceased from all actions proceedings claims and demands on the part of any porson or persons in respeot of the said residuary estate 30 dietributed and retained respectively by the said N. N. as herein, before recited and in particular in respoot of the respeotive sbares of the eaid F. Y. and J. X. or for or in reepect of continuing the pasment of the said annuity bequeathed to the said F. X. to bis assigas or for or in respeot of any act or thing whatsoever at any time made done or omitted by the trustees or trustee for the time being of the paid will of the said X. or any of them in or about the administra. tion of the estate of the said testator or the execution of the truste of bis said will or codicil wbet ber herein before specifically mentioned or referred to or not and from all costs damages and expenses to be incurred by any suoh action proceeding olaim or demand as aforesaid or otherwise in respect of the premises. IN WITNESS &c. Master Day will now act as Vacation master up to and inoluding Wednesday, the 11th prox. The September general session for cases arising on the north and south sides of the Thames will commence on Tuesday, the 12th inst., at the Sessione-bouge, Newington, at 10.30. An intermediate session for oases arising in the county of Middle. sex, will commence on Saturday, the 23rd inst., at Caxton Hall, Westminster, at ten o'clook. Mr. Justice A. T. Lawrence completed seven years' service on the Bench last Sunday, having been appointed on the 3rd Sept. 1904. Mr. Albert Tomlinson Wright, of Tyn.y.rhos, Weston Rhyn, Oswestry, Salop. and late of New Brighton, Cheshire, solicitor, of the firm of Mesers. Wright, Beckett, Wright, and Co., solicitors, of Water. street, Liverpool, left estate of the grogg value of £21,501, of wbiob the net personalty has been sworn at £9198. Mr. George Edward Cokayne, barrister.at-law, of Exeter House, Roehampton. and of Dove House Green, Ashbourne, Derbyshire, Clarenceux King of Arms sinoe 1894, formerly Rouge Dragon Pursuivant, afterwards Lancaster Herald and Norroy King of Arms, who died on the 6th Aug., aged eighty-six, lest estate of the gross value of £76,436, of wbich the net personalty bas boon sworo at £65,497. Mr. Abraham Greenwood Eastwood, of Stoney Royd, Todmorden, Yorks, solicitor, head of the firm of Messrs. Eastwood and Sutcliffe, for sixty-two years clerk to the Todmorden magistrates, and for over fifty years County Court registrar, who died on the 23rd April last, Aged eighty-seven years, left estate of the gross value of £158,733, of wbich the pet pereonalty has been sworn at £141,054. The Dublin Gazette announces that His Majesty's letters patent bave passed the Great Seal of Ireland appointing the Right Hon. Redmond Jobn Barry to be His Majesty's Chancellor of Ireland. At a meeting of the Privy Couocil in Dublin Castle on the 5th inst. the Right Hon. Redmond John Barry took and subsoribed the oath of allegiance and the official oath on his appointment as Lord Chancellor of Ireland. The Septomber Sessions for the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court were opened on the 5th inst. at the Sessiono-house in the Old Bailey. The calendar contaloed the names of 146 persons under committal for trial, thirty-nine of whom are on bail. Mr. Herbert Austin, the Daputy Clerk of Arraigns, read the new Commissions of Oger and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery issued by Royal Warrant under the Great Seal under date of the 19th July. These commiseions supersede, though they do not vary, the letters patent issued in the previous reigo. A legal debating society has recently been formed, and will be known as tbo North London Legal Debating Society. The society has been formed with the object of bringing together members and students of the Legal Profession residing in North London for the purpose of discussing legal matters generally, and more especially the decisions of the law courts. The persone eligible for membersbip are barristers, solicitors, members or students of any of the love of Court, solicitors' articled clerks, and clerks who have been articled to solicitors. Meetings of the society will take place at Crouch End overy Monday evening, commencing on the 16th proz., at 8.30 p.m. The president is Mr. R. Stoiry Deans, barrister-at-law, and Mr. G. H. Bowen is the vice-president. Full partioulars can be obtained from the treasurer. Mr. A. E. Woolnougb, 68a, Lincoln's.ion-fields, or from the secretary, Mr. H. P. Gisborne, 50, Berkeley.road, Crouch Eod, N. A preliminary mceting in connection with the Prison Congrers to be held in London in 1915 took place on Wedoesday last at the office of the Prison Commission. Whiteball, under the presidency of Sir Evelyn Ruggles. Brise. Professor Henderson, the president of the reoopt Congress at Washington, Professor Van der Aa, the Secretary. General of the International Prison Commission, Mr. Gibbong, C.B., the Master of Polwartb, the obairmen of the Irish and Scottish Prison Boards respectively. Major Rogers, R.E, and Mr. Basil Thomson, were present. Various points concerning the plan and procedure of the congress were discussed, which will be further considered at & formal meeting of the International Prison Commission to be held in the course of next year. The death is announced of Maitre Carraby, the sixtieth anniver. eary of whose admission to the Order of Advocates jo Paris was marked, as recorded in the Law Times of the 3rd June last, by the bútonnier of the Order waiting upon him to offer bim officially the heartfelt wishes of his colleagues. The venerable lawyer then banded over to the bilonnier a som of 33,000 francs (£1320) in State bonds, the income of wbich from time to time sball be awarded to the avocat who in the opinion of the council of the Order to be the most deserviog among those brave young fellows, always struggling, upon whom Fortune does not seem to smile.” He was born in 1831, and made his name in 1857, when he was an avocat of six years' standing, in the defence of a band of malefactors whose misdeed8-robbery and murder-bad extended over a period of thirty-six years. Maitre Carraby was engaged in a dumber of sensational oa ses, and his defence of Leroy du Bourg for the murder of his wife was the occnsion of Dumas fils' brochure Tue.la! Maitre Carraby had not engaged in aotual practice for some years. Of him the Temps says: “Maitre Carraby fut up artiste délicat et un fia lettró; il fut surtout un ami sûr et dévoué." What we should consider one of the most remarkable claims for a breach of contract ever heard in a court of law bas just been decided in the court of the juge de paix at Génaville-les-Baroobes (Meurthe et Moselle). Tbo subject in ciepute was sacred, yet both tbe plaintiff (the demander esse) and the defendeur, a priest, seemed to have looked upon the whole affair from a striotly business standpoiot. Madame Fondeur, a looal householder, sued the curé of the parish, the Abbé Fabry, for the return of 16fr. 500. (about 133. Id.), representing the fee paid in advance to the cure for the performance of a service funèbre. The demanderesse founded her claim upon the fact that the curé had quitted the altar at the Kyrie Eleison, leaving the mourners in a state of astonishment, and the Mass in suspense In defence it was pleaded that, if he had left the church, it was on account of the anseomly manner in which some of the mourners acted. Moreover, he domanded that Madame Fondeur's claim should be dismissed on the ground that it was not sho who had instructed him to perform the service in dispute. The juge de paix gave judgment in favour of the lady for the amount claimed, holding that she had paid for a Mage which had not been celebrated. The statement, wbiob has been very generally made, that Mr. Redmond Barry has broken the record by becoming Lord Chanoellor of Ireland at the early age of five and forty is incorrect. lo 1789 John FitzGibbon (Earl of Claro) was promoted, like Mr. Barry, from the Irish Attorney.Generalebip to the Lord Chanoellorship, wbiob be filled till his death in 1802. Ho was born in 1749, and had not completed his fortieth year when intrusted with the Great Seal of Ireland. In 1885 Mr. John Naieb was promoted from the Irish Attorney-Generalsbip to the Lord Chancellorship. He was born in 1841, and had not completed his forty-fourth year. Lord Ashbourne, on bis first appointment to the Irish Chancellorship in 1885, bad not completed his fordy.seventh year, and is therefore, in respect of the comparatively early age at wbich he obtained the Irish Great Seal, & good second to Mr. Barry. It is of interest to recall the fact that both Lord Clare an Lord Ashbourne, who became Irish Chancellors at remarkably early ages, were the song of men bred to the pro. session of the law. Lord Clare's father practised at the Irish Bar with eminent 8 nocess, and was a member of the Irish House of Commons. He published Notes of Cases Determined at Westminster, which obtained the warm praises of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke. Lord Ashbourne's father, Mr. William Gibson, was an Irish solicitor of great eminenoo, wbo was president of the Irish looorporated Law Society. The Irish Lord Chancellor, who is the head of the Irish Judicialy, is the only member of that judiciary whose tenure of office is during the pleasure of the Crown, and not during good behaviour, under the provisions of the Act of Settlement and other statutes, whose pro. visions have been by subsequent legislation extended to Ireland. His appointment is made by the formal tendering to him of the Great Seal by the Lord-Lieutenant, and can be terminated by his resignation of the Great Seal either voluntarily or on demand by the Lord. Lieutenant, as representing the Sovereigo, so to do. The commissions of the Irish judges are, strange to gay, perfected, not in the Irisb Office, but in the Home Office. The Irish Office in days gone by was subordinate to the Home Office, and the Minister primarily responsible for the carrying on of Governments in Ireland and the maintenance of law and order in that country was the Home Secretary. The Irish Office may now be regarded as a department of State, and the Minister, whose strict designation is Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, is now obiefly responsible for the administration of that country. The issue of the commissions of members of the Irish Judiciary from the Home Office, where also the patents of Irish peera ges are perlected, is a survival of an old system which has in practice been absolutely superseded. |
0 Reviews Arvustused pole kinnitatud, aga Google kontrollib neid võltssisu suhtes ja eemaldab selle. Write review |