« EelmineJätka »
PROMOTIONS & APPOINTMENTS judgment and integrity of purpose led him to be time by his medical adviser, Mr. S. H. Evans. He
often selected as an umpire between contending had, however, no serious attack until August last, (N.B.-Announcements of appointments being in the nature parties, and it was rare indeed that the faintest whe", whilst travelling in Wales on an excessively of advertiseinents.wars charged *. 6d, each, for which question as to the justness of his decision was hot day, he was so utterly prostrated that his life should be inclosed.]
heard. It was, however, in his career as clerk to was for some time despaired of. The attack THE Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas has the justices that Mr. Barr stood out most promi. which has proved fatal was of a similar character appointed Mr. Charles Reginald Gibson, of Dart- nently before his fellow-townsmen. Words of the to the one which occurred in August last, and the ford, Kent, Solicitor, to be a Commissioner for highest praise were heard on the lips of all who immediate cause of death is stated to have been taking acknowledgments of married women.
were brought into contact with him. Poor and the rupture of a vessel in the brain.
and his kind and sympathising heart. Through titioners in the town, and his skill and knowledge Mr. W. C. Ward has been appointed acting out the whole of his thirty-five years' official con. as a real property lawyer were well known to and Prothonotary of the Court of Pleas at Durham, nection with the Borough Bench he discharged his recognised by the Profession By the painstaking, and Clerk 'to the Commissioner of Taxes for duties in the most satisfactory manner, and the able, and conscientious discharge of his profes. Easington ward in the same county in the place of magistrates, who have often been heard to speak sional duties during the whole of his career, and his deceased father.
of him as their "right hand man," repeatedly his consistent and upright character, he had won
manifested their admiration of his many excellent the esteem and confidence of numerous clients The Right Hon. Sir William Bovill, Knight, qualities. In 1860 they testified their regard for and the general respect of his fellow townsmen. Lord Chief Justice of Her Majesty's' Court of their clerk by subscribing for a full-length oil Mr. Vallack, borough coroner, held an inquest Common Pleas at Westminster, has appointed portrait of him, and it now adorns the magistrates' on Saturday, when from the evidence of Mr. F. James Mote, o No. 1, Walbrook, in the City of room adjoining the Borough Court in the Town Wright, surgeon, it was inferred that death had London, and Eltham, in the County of Kent, Hall. The artist was William Crabb, and a resulted from the rupture of a vessel in the brain,
gentleman, to be a perpetual Commissioner for massive gilt frame bears the inscription" To consequent upon old standing disease of the heart,
the names of thirty-three magistrates (fifteen of
THE COURTS & COURT PAPERS.
Deceased had been thrice married, but he leaves
SITTINGS AND CAUSE LIST FOR
MICHAELMAS TERM 1871.
Court of Appeal in Chancery. Born on the 3rd Sept. 1794, in George-street, the town hall and the parish church were tolled out
(Lefore the Lord CHANCELLOR.) near the present Kirkgate Market, where his of respect for his memory.
At Westminster. father, Mr. Richard Barr, resided, Mr. Barr had Mr. Bruce, the stipendiary magistrate, who pre- Thursday, Nov. 2 Appeal motions and appeals
At Lincoln's-inn, just completed his seventy-seventh year; and sided in the borough court, interposed during the
Nov. 3 Appeals many were the changes that he had witnessed in disposal of the business there, and said "Intelli. Friday
6 Ditto the town in whose affairs he had for half a century gence has reached the court of the death of Mr.
7 Ditto taken a prominent and active part. Destined for Barr. Arybody who knew Mr. Barr as a mere
Wednesday 8 Petitions and appeals the legal profession, he was articled to an eminent acquaintance, and certainly the gentlemen prac Thursday 9 Appeals firm of solicitors in Leeds, Messrs. Upton, Nichol. tising in this court, feel very much grieved by the Friday 10 Appeal motions and appeals
13 Appeals son, and Hemingway, and his life career as a intelligence. Mr. Barr's health has long been bad, Monday
Tuesday sound and able lawyer tells how thorough was the but it has been hoped that he would still rally.
Wednesday training that he received from them. Entering Unfortunately that hopa has been disappointed.
Thursday the office a youth, he remained in it until the dis. This morning he has died. I have known Mr. Friday 17 Appeal motions and appeals solution of the firm, when he became partner with Barr a great many years. I cannot say that I have Monday
20 Appeals Mr. Nicholson. Mr. Barr's care and judgment as known him so intimately as many gentlemen ; but Tuesday
Wednesday 22 Petitions and appeals a legal practitioner early brought him under the I have known him as a professional man upwards
Thursday 23 Appeals notice of the local authorities, and on the office of a quarter of a century. I have practised in a
24 Appeal motions and appeals of coroner becoming vacant in 1824 he court in which he used to advise the magistrates,
(Before the Lords JUSTICE 8.) ceived the appointment. The firm of Nicholson and since I occupied this place I have had the and Barr existed for several years, during which benefit of his advice myself, and I always found Thursday, Nov. 2 Appeal motions time the offices of town clerk, clerk of the peace, him a man of the greatest kindness. Not only
Nov. 3 Appeals and magistrates' clerk were filled by deceased's we, bat every one, even the poorest man in Friday
Saturday 4 Petitions in lunacy, appeal peti. partner. After the passing of the Municipal Cor Leeds, knew Mr. Barr to be a man of the utmost
tions, and appeals poration Act, these three offices were distributed. kindness of heart; indeed, if he had any faults Monday.. 6 Appeals That of clerk to the magistrates remained with they arose from that excessive kindness of heart Tuesday
Wednesday Mr. Nicholson, and it was held by him until his which he had in such an eminent degree. His death in 1836. For the responsible post thus ren. merits as a lawyer were very great. He advised Thursday 9 Bankrupt appeals and appeals
10 Apreal motions dered vacant there were two candidates-Mr. Barr the magistrates, I don't know exactly how long,
Saturday 11 Petitions in lunacy, appeal peti. and Mr. George Rawson, jun. - but the latter but I should think for not less than half a century.
tious, and appeals eventually withdrew his offer to serve the Bench, He was educated in one of the most eminent Monday.. 13 Appeals and Mr. Barr was, on the 3rd Dec., 1836, unani old offices in the town, and during the time he Tuesday 14 Apreals from the County Palatine
of Lancaster, appeals from the mously elected. Of the thirteen justices present advised the magistrates no one case in which he at the meeting at which this appointment was
Stanaries Court and appeals advised them was falsified by the event. It was
Wednesday 15 Appeals made only three-Sir Thomas Beckett, Bart., Mr. a great benefit to a town like this, a large town
Thursduy 16 Bankrupt appeals and appeals Thomas Benyon, and Mr. Darnton Lupton-re: with a large mixed population, that the magis. Friday
17 Appeal motions main in the commission of the peace. Mr. Barr trates had the benefit and advice of such a man. Saturday 18 Petitions iu lunacv, appeal peti.
tions, and appeals had previously resigned his coronership, and his I have known in my time three eminent men in
20 Appeals successor was Mr. John Lofthouse. With this Leeds who held this position-Mr. Eddison, who Monday
Tuesday gentleman he entered into partnership, and on
was for many years town clerk, Mr. Ikin, and Mr. the 1st Jan., 1837, the firm became Barr, Loft- Barr. Without
saying a word about the merits of Thursday,
23 Bankrupt appeals and appeals house, and Nelson. No further change took place i he has done to the town, surpassed both of these Saturday
the others, Mr. Barr, by the length of the service Friday 24 Appeal motions until the death of Mr. Lofthouse, when the name
25 Petitions in lunacy, appeal peti. of the firm was altered to Barr and Nelson ; on gentlemen, because he had the honour of sitting
tions and appeals the admission of Mr. Frederick Barr, the nephew here for many years, and of advising the magis. Such days (if any) as the Lords Justices shall be of the senior partner, a few years ago, it assumed trates from day to day. I am sure everybody engaged in the full court or at the Judicial Committee the style by which it is now so widely known- here will sympathise with Mrs. Barr and with his of the Privy Council are excepted. Barr, Nelson, and Barr. friends for the loss they have sustained. The loss
Appeals. In addition to discharging the responsible work to the town is a very great one-indeed, I think
Peter ». Nicolls
Dixon r. Lamare falling upon him as clerk to the magistrates, and there is no one who will not be affected by the Boyd v. Petrie
Glegg r. Rees
| Thompson r. Thomas as the leading member of a firm in large and mournful intelligence, and no one can help re.
Patch v, Rolt influential legal practice, Mr. Barr was for many specting the memory of the man who has just Wright r. Pitt
Oriental Financial Corpo.
Pilcher c. Rawlins left us. years the professional adviser of the Leeds Im.
Barker u. Barker
ration (Lim.) v. Overend, provement Commissioners, and in that capacity
Mr. Ald. Oxley, who was also on the bench, Hunter u. Walters-Cur. Gurney, and Co. (Lim,) he remained until the passing of the Improve cxpressed his full concurrence in what had been link v. Walters-Daruell Upmanu t. Elkun
Allounes v. Elkan ment Act of 1842, by which the powers of the said by Mr. Bruce. commissioners became vested in the town council.
Land Credit Company of Mellwraith v. The Dublin
Ireland v. Lord Fermoy Trunk Counecting Rail. He also acted for a long period in a similar manner
W. ROBOTHAM, ESQ.
Nelson r, Thompson
way Company on behalf or the overseers for the township of We regret to have to record the death of Mr. Wil. Pride c. Bubb
Calisher v. Forbes Leeds, his successor, on his resignation in 1840, liam Rohotham, solicitor, of the firm of Messrs.
Heasman 1. Pearse being the late Mr. Charles Naylor. When the Robotham and Son, of Derby, which occurred on
Richardson o. Richardson Dent v. Ottoman Railway
The Mayor, Aldermen and Company-Fra.er t. Ot. Act of Parliament, authorising in 1837 the con Friday evening last week, under unusually pain.
Burgesses of the City of toman Railway Company struction by a company, of the Leeds Waterworks ful circumstances. The deceased gentleman at- Exeter ». Earl of Devon Vives v. Ottoman Railway at Eccup, and elsewhere, was obtained. Mr. Barr tended the sale of an estate by auction at the Bell Ingram r. Upperton was the solicitor to the company, and that posi. Hotel, on that evening, and purchased the pro- The Credit
roncier and Dent v. O:toman Railway tion he retained until the waterworks were purperty on behalf of a client. He was about signing
Mobilier of England, Company - Fraser . Ot. chased by the corporation in 1852. He also acted the contract when he was seized with illness. Mr.
Limited (in liquidation) toman Railway Company
Cbabord v. New as legal adviser to the patrons of the Leeds parish Wright, Dr. Taylor, and Mr. Borough, surgeons, Homewood v. Lambe
Company (Limited) church, besides holding several other professional were speedily in attendance, but notwithstanding Radford v. Willis
The Mayor, &c, of the City appointments. their efforts, Mr. Robotham expired in a few Phillips v. Mullings
of London , Sandon l'he duties of all these appointments Mr. Barr minutes.
Chadwick v. Chadwick The Mayor, &c., of the City discharged with great ability, and so extensive Mr. Robotham had for a number of years suf.
Cowles . Gale
of London v. Metropoli. was his knowledge of all legal matters that his fered from an affection of the heart which occa
Ingram v. Upperton
tan Railway Co.-Metro. Heasman v. Pearse
politan Railway Co. r. advice was frequently sought by members of his sionally produced embarrassment in his breathing, Ellis e. Barker
Mayor, &c., of the City of own profession. His calmness and clearness of and for this he had been attended from time to Sollory 1. Leaver
7 Ditto 8 Ditto
Pike c. Dickinson
v. Lord Sondes
Watt v, Muirhead
The Peninsular, West
Bank Limited) v. The Thursday, Nov. 2 Motions and general paper
Thrupp v. Seruton
and Hampstead Junction Wilson v. Lloyd At Chancery-lane.
London General Omnibus Richardson v. Houghton
Levick v. Noble
Company (Limited) Friday
Bloomer v. Spittle
Brown v. Lindsay
Mayar v. Mercer
Liddiard v. Birdsey
Harfield v. Bower
Squires v. Walker
Taylor v. Atherton
Constable v. Turner Hunter v. Bullock
Allhusen v. Whittell Tuesday
Forbes v. Williams
| Viscount Newry v. Earl of 9 Motions and general paper
Pope v. Probyn
The Agra Bank (Limited)! Kilmorey
Last v. Drake
v, Northcott Friday
Bowyer v. White
Harrison v. Topham
Martin v. Martin
Tisley v. Tagg
Secker v. Nixey
Cameron v. Somerville Ingleby v. Ingleby Monday 13 General paper
Red path v. Pettis
The Cowbridge Haslam v. Eastwood Attwood v. Brown
Leman v. Saffery 14 Ditto
Price v. White
The Gresbam Life Assur.
Humphreys v. Hodgson
way Company v. Watson Murray v. Hadley
Garcia r. Pochin
ance Society v. Crossman Jackson The Friday 17 General paper
Warner v. Warner
Hudson v. Cook
Bigg v, The Mayor, Alder. Baskettv. Skeel
Richmond v. Richmond
men, and Commons of Re C. F. George's EstateMonday 20 General paper
Dooner v. Tolley
Neames v. George-Clark
Kent v. Ingoldby Tuesday
Glassbrook r. Carvell
Robinson v. Barret
Hooper v. Hooper
Gumm v. Hallett
White v. Watkins
Marchant v. Davies
Lacon, Bart. v. The ProJones v. Jones
Wooler v. Wooler Friday 26 Petitions, short causes, adjourned
Nichols v. Hill
vincial Banking Corpora-
Massie v. Ray
The Provincial Banking
(Limited) v. Woolloton Kent v. Spokes
Corporation (Limited) v. Co. (Limited) v. Smith and copies left with the secretary on or before the
Robey and Co.'s Perseve- Motion v. Moojen
Swales v. Kirk
Cobbitt v. Woodward
v. Ollier they should be heard, and any causes intended to be
Calthrop v. Rummens Jerred v. Berry heard as short causes must be su marked at least one May v. Constable
Hanrott v. Hulett
Parry v. Murray
Willems v. Dimsdale clear day before the same can be put in the paper to be
Hopkinson v. Hopkinson The Central Bank of Lon-
don, Limited v. Quail so heard. Causes.
Melsome v. Pinniger
Telford v. The Metropoli. Matterson v. Baerselman Walker v. Walker Morris v. Edmunds Quick v. Quick Silvester v. Moore
tan Board of Works King v. Engleback Commissioners of Sewers Smithe v. Munn
Smith v. Farrah
Ferneley v. Buckley of the City of London v. Jubb v. Tuckwood
Freebury v. Freebury George v. Howes
V.C. Wickens' Court.
Cutclife v. Goddard
Hayne v. Harvey
Thursday, Nov. 2 Motions
Goddard v. Hughes
America v. Blakely
3 Petitions and general paper Same v. Same Vanner v. Frost Vickers v. McEwen Hine v. Hine
4 Short causes and general paper
Loysel v. Freeth
6 General paper
Church v. Tamvaco
Wilson v. Brown
Motions and general paper Jarvis v. Allen-Allen v. Mortimer v. Wheatland
Birks v. Silverwood
10 Petitions and general paper Jarvis Mellor v. Mellor Grace . Dutton Atty Etough
Saturday 11 Short causes and general paper Deeks v. Bayley Paley v. Dury Champion . The Conser- Pemberton v. Watkins Monday..
13 General paper
Wednesday 15 Ditto
16 Motions and general paper
17 Petitions and general paper (Limited) v. Grant Shrewsbury v Marshall way Company
and Brampton Railway Saturday 18 Short causes and general paper Littleword v. Ownsworth Banks v. Sidebotham
Harman r. Derby
20 General paper
Wednesday 22 Ditto
The Ecclesiastical Commis- Armstrong v. Holmes Thursday 23 Ditto
24 Petitions, short causes, and genera Wakeford v. Jay Wells v. Frankish
25 Motions and general paper Vansittart v. Osborne Besley v. Dayman
(Limited) v. Teede
Tomkins v. Parker
Richardson v. Dibb
Nesham v. Selby
London Railway Co.
Nicholson v. Catt
Holmes v. Holmes
Sykes v. Sykes
Packer v. Page
Shelley v. Maber
Owen v. Barton
V.C. Bacon's Court.
Briggs v. Upton
Penistan v. Worsley Hartland v. Murrell Wrigley v. Martin
Attorney-General v. John. Sherwin v. Bodill stone
Statford v. Stafford Mileham v. Pearce-Hinx. Holmes v. Howse
Thursday, Nov. 2 Motions
Butterfield v. Terry
Rigg v. Merrin!
Browne v. Rxdford
Cooper v. Aves
Sborland . Bertram
4 Petitions, short causes, and general Thomas v. Richardson
Richardson v. Hodgetts Richardson v. Morton
Armitage v. Armitage
Re Thompson's Estate, Capnock v. Cannock
7 General paper
Stockdale v. Thompson Phillips v. Brookes Wednesday 8 Ditto
Teague v. Teague
Robinson v. Grave Thursday 9 Motions and adjourned summonses Bower v. Smith
Bontoft v. Wilson
Orcbard v. Lake
Leggett v. Scott
Saturday 11 Petitions, short causes, and general Martin v. Saunders Spye v. Haswell
Catt ». Tourle
Flower v. Flower
Russeil v. Martin
Lloyd v. Tozer
Pearce v. Carrington Miller v. Miller
Brodrick v. Hewby
Johnson v. Bott monses, and general paper Thursday 16 Motions and adjourned summonses Miller v. Campbell
Piper v. Mann
Taylor v. Miller
Marquess of Downshire v, Tuesday 7 Ditto Saturday 18 Petitions, sbort causes, and general
Bass v. Adams
Bellyse Wednesday 8 Ditto
Surry v. Slater
Finnis v, Tuke
Ayre v. Eager
Morgan v. Seaton Friday 10 Petitions and general paper
Griffiths v. Oakley
Re Brown-Rattey v.Hullah Saturday 11 Short causes, adjourned sum- Wednesday 22 Ditto
Veley v. Wells
Rattey v. Jackson monses, and general paper
23 Ditto Thursday
Ashton v. Corrigan Monday
Phillips v. Silvester 13 General paper Friday
Master v. Richards
24 Petitions, short causes, and general Faith v. Emsley. Tuesday 14 Ditto
Wildman v. Newby
Rousseau v. Smith Wednesday 15 Ditto
Saturday 16 Motions and general paper
Mure v. Mure
25 Motions and adjourned summonses Hampshire Banking Co. v. Thursday
Stubbs v. Smith
Guylee v. Guylee
Fulton v. Wilson Saturday 18 Short causes, adjourned sum. Ward v. The Wolverhamp- West Bromwich Banking Bourdin v. Greenwood Blaud v. Gayford monses, ond general paper ton Waterworks Co. Company
French v. Mayhew
Buggs v. Tompson 20 General paper Monday
Sleeman v. Wilson
Earl of Dudley v. Gye Tuesday 21 Ditto
Torr v. Thomas
Stonehouse v. Dobin 22 Ditto Highett v. Dampier Hooper v. Webb
Alexander v, Shorland Grinstead v. Lucas Thursday
Cadman v. Cadman
Savage v. Tyers
Samuel v. Page 24 Petitions, short causes, adjourned Greene v. The West Che- Wilson v. Tucker
Hext v. Gili
Jacobs v. Jacobs summonses, and general paper shire Railway
Anderson v. Anderson ompany
Soffe v. Prince
Alcock v. Coonop Saturday 25 Motions and general paper Dawson v. Robinson Bigg v. The Corporation oi Saull v. Saull
Gardener v. Jewers Causes.
Murray v. Clayton
Butler v Webb
Beattie v. Lord El ury Walker v. Jersey Water J. Mitchell and Co. (Limi. Croaker v. Standing Finlay v.
Works Co. (Limited) ted) v. Great Northern
Alexander v. Palmer
Railway Company Hemming v. Maddick Tooth v. Mort
Smith v. Gibson
Arnold v. Bradbury
Simpson v. Hempson The Landed Estates Co. Lewis v. Lewis
Earle v. Appleyard
Clark v. Pike
Shiers v. Haswell Brutton v.' Parish of St. Sculthorpe v. Tipper
Cock v. Green
Griesiell v. Jackson
Best v. Ständeven Abbott v. Bakers and Con-Cruikshank v. Duffin
Palmer v. Flower
Reed v. Southgate fectioners' Tea Associa- Raith by v. Hall
Savage v. Spell
Godrich v. Fowler tion (Limited) Official liquidator of the Wade-Gery v. Handley Bemish v. Hare
Mellersh v. Faulkner Hall v. Ramsbottom The Sheffield Improved Birmingham Banking Co. Charlton w. Charlton Preston v. Mayor, &c., of Barnard v. Clark
Johnston v. Kelley Industrial and Provident v. Carter
Bond v. Milbourn
Nickless v. Owen Society (Lim.) 7. Jarvis Deakins v. Andrews
Ramsey v. Hooper
Harvey v. Jannings Taylor v. Taylor
The London and Paris Leicester Water Works Bennett v. Partridge Golding v. Wright • Bart. Pemberton u. Neill Hotel Co. (Limited) v. Company v. Gimson Rapley v. Walmsley
Cundall v. Proctor
Vertue . Miller
Griffiths v. Jones
N.B.-In Vice-Chancellor Wickens' Court no cause, motion for decree, or further consideration, can, except by order of the court, be marked to stand over, if it be within twelve of the last cause or matter in the printed paper of the day for hearing.
Any causes intended to be heard as short causes before either of the Vice-Chancellors must be so marked at least one clear day before the same can be put in the paper to be so heard.
Gazette, Oct. 27.
Hazlitt. Sols. Megars, Lewis, Ely.pl, Holborn. Sur. Xov. 17
To surrender in the Country.
Holden. Sur, Nov. 13
Heywood. Pet. Oct. 25. Reg. Hoiden. Sur. Nov. 8
Oct. 23. Reg. Bolton. Sur. Nov.
Reg. Acwurth. Sur. Nov, 10
Jones. Sur. Nov. 16
Woodall. Sur. Nov. 13
Bishop. Sur. Nov, 10
Pet. Oct. 34. Reg. Willoughby. Sur. Nov. 10
Gazette, Oct. 31.
To surrender in the Country.
Oct. 27. Rer. Willoughby. Sur. Nov. 10
Portsmouth. Pet. Oct. 11. Reg. Howard. Sur. Nov. 11
Reg. Mortimer. Sur. Noy. 14
son. Sur Nov. 14
Sur. Nov. 16
Woodall. Sur. Nov. 22
Gazette, Oct. 24.
Plymouth. Aug. 14, 1871
Gazette, Oct. 27.
KAY, THOMAS YOUNG, auctioneer, Liverpool: Nov. 8, at two, at GOWER, MARY AXX, grocer, Gray's-inn-rd; Nov. 10, at eleven, at
office of Sols., Meadows and Crang (and not Craig as erroneously office of Sol., Noton, Great Swan-alley, Moorgate-st
GRUNDY, THOMAS, out of business, Salford; Nov. 9, at eleven, at
HARBOROUGH, ALFRED, music seller, Southport; Nov. 10, at
at twelve, at office of Sol., Johnston, Newcastle-upon-Tyne HAZELL, BENJAMIN, corn chandler, Flood st, Chelsea: Nov. 10,
HOYLE, ROBERT, felt manufacturer, Hollinbank and Wood-nills,
and Coulson, Manchester MCNAIRN, JAMES BROWN, draper, Heigham; Nov. 14, at eleven, HURD, FREDERICK, engineer, Wakefield; Nov. 8, at three, at at office of Sol, Stanley, Norwich
the Statford Arms Hotel, Wakefiell. Sol., Gill, Wakefield MIDDLETON, RICHARD, engineer, Leeds; Nov. 13, at three, at JONEN, EVAX, shipowner, New Quay; Nov. 3, at eleven, at the office of Sols., tick and Jones, Leeds
Townhall, Aberystwith. Sol., Hughes MILIS, HALFORD, grorer, Sandgate; Nov. 10, at twelve, at office JOXES, JOHN GWYNDAF, grocer, Pwllheli: Nov.9), at two, at the of Sols., Carter and Bell, Lendenhall.st
British Hotel, Bangor. Sols,, Jones and Jones, Portmados
King.st, Hammersmith, and High-st. Kensington, and High-st, three, at 12, Hatton-garden. Sol., Marshall, Lincoln's-inn-
twelve, at office of Sol., Howell, Chenpaide
of Messrs. Barnard, Thomas, Cawker, and Company, Temple.st, twelve, at officer of Sols.. Kynaston and Gasquet, King's ArinsSwansen
yd, Moorgatest MOSES, JOIN, surveyor, Machpelah, Hebden-bridge; Nov. 10, at LEO, LOUIN, professor of music, Aberdeen-pk-rd : Nov. 13, at two, three, at the Crown hotel, Horton-t, Halifax
ut office 01 Sol., Barnett. New BroadONLEY, MARY ANN, earthenware dealer, Norwich: Nov. 10, at
MARTIS, WATSON WOOD, brewer's assistant, Birmingham; twelve, at office of Sols., Miller, Son, and Stevens, Norwich
Nov. 10, it three, at office of Sol., Rowlands, Birminzham
at office of Mr. Moon, publie accountant, Pavement, Finsbury. at eleven, at the White Hart, Newbury, Sol, Lucas, Newbury
MONTGOMERY, DONALD, draper, Swansea ; Nov. 13, at two, at
twelve, at office of Sol., Barrow, Wolverhampton
Sol., Maher, Birmingham PARSONAGE, WILLIAM ROYLASCE, fruiterer. Liverpool; Nov. 16, MOORHOUSE, JOSEPH, yarn spinner, Wakefield, and Silcotor, near at three, at office of Masters and Fletcher, Liverpool
Wakefield: Nov, 7, at three, as offices of Fernandes and Gill, PICKERING, WILLIAM, grocer, Birmingham; Xov. 11, at eleven, Wakefield at office of Sol, Arsinder, Birmingham
MORGAN, WILLIAW, factory operative, Pendleton; Nov. 9, at
Nov. 16. at thren, at the Clarendon-rooms, South John-st. NEWSAN, WILLIAM, milliner, Nottingham; Nov. 8, at twelve, at
office of Sol., Belk, Nottingham
Nov. 20, ot one, at 1:34. St. John-street-rd, Clerkenwell. Sol., office of Sol., Harvey, Leicester
PADDOCK, WILLIAM, hotelkeeper, Ellesmere: Nov. 14, at three,
twelve, at the Bridge house hotel, London-bridge, Southwark.
PEARS, JOHN, tanner, Whitehaven ; Nov. 8, at two, at office of
PENDLERITY, JOHN, grocer, Bradford : Nov. 13, at three, at office
ford ; Nov. 13, at eleven, at office of Sol., Lancaster, Bradford RADLEY, WILLIAM, oilman, Bethnal-green-rd : Nov. 13, at three,
ROBINSON, THOMAN, tailor, Halifax; Nov. 13, at three, at office of
SCOTT, WILLIAM, preengrocer, Swansea ; Nov. 3, at three, at
SHARP, EDWIN, grocer, Stoke-upon-Trent ; Nov. 13, at eleven, at
SIMS, ALFRED HENRY, ammunition manufacturer, Birmingham, SNELL. HENRY, grocer, Birmingham; Nov. 10, at twelve, at office and Titford. par. Halesowen; Nov. 10, at eleven, at office of Sol., of Sol., Benton, Birmingham
Rowlands, Biriningham TAYLOR, JOHx, warehouseman, Dudley; Nov. 13, at eleven, at SMITH, DAVID CLARKE, boot dealer. Heath-st, Tampstead; office of Sol., Forrest, Oldbury
Nov. 4, at eleven, at office of Sol., Johnston, Southampton-bldgs TIDSWELL, WILLIAM, ale merchant, Southport: Nov. 16, at hall- Chancery-A
past eleven, at the Temperance hotel, Southport. Sol., Walton, STEPHENS, EMMA, baker, Landport; Nov.9, at two, at offices of Southport
Edmonds, Davis, and Co., Portsea. Sols., Messrs. Ford, PortWATERS, CORNELIUS, brewer, Cirencester; Nov. 14, at eleven, at sea
offices of Mullings, Ellett, and Co., Cirencester. Sol., Ellett, STUBOS, SAMUEL, bricklayer, Tunstall ; Nov. 10, at three, at office Cirencester
of Sol. Salt. Tuntsall WATTS, HEYRY CHARLES, architect. Manchester: Nov, 16, at TALBOTT, TRAYTOX, butcher, St. Leonards-on-Sea; Nov. 10, at three, at office of Sol., Richardson, Manchester
twelve, nt office of Sol., Langham, Hastings
Nov. 13, at twelve, at office of Read and Dangerfield, Milk-st, Lion hotel, High-st, Exeter. Sol., Floud, Exeter
TAYLOB, RILEY, draper, Halifax; Nov. 8, at twelve, at the Angel WILSON, THOMAS, grocer, Durlington: Nov, 11, at ten, at offices hotel, Manchester. Sols., Wavell, Philbrick, Foster, and Wavell, of Mr. George Hudson, public accountant, Stockton-on Tees
Halifax WOODS, JOSIAN, grocer, Preston ; Nov. 16, at half past two, at THOMAS, DANIEL, builder, Petherton-rd, Highbury New-pk office of Sol., Edelston. Preston
Nov. 15, at two, at office of Sol., Cooke, Gresham-buildings
Nov. 13, at three, at office of Sol., Langman, Wolverhampton VIPAX. JOSEPH MAYLIN, gentleman, Ashdon; Nov. 9, at eleven,
WALEN, PHILIP, shoe dealer, Crewe: Nov. 13, at two, at the Royal
WATSON, SAMUEL, tailor, Tunstall; Nov. 17, at two, at office of
Sol., Llewellyn. Tunstall
WEEDALL, THOMAS, jciner, Salford; Nov. 6, at three, at office of
Sol., Addleshaw, Manchester
Nov. 9, at twelve, at offices of Slattery and Co., Wellington- office of Sol., Walker, Portsen
WEST, EDWARD, farmer, Storrington; Nov. 20, at one, at the
WILDE, WILLIAM KNOWLES, linen draper, Ardwick and Man. ARTHUR, JOHx, weaver, Ferryside: Nov, 7, at two, at the Town- chester: Nov. 15, at three, at office of Sols., Blain and Chorlton, hall, Carmarthen. Sol., Lloyd, Haverfardwest
(under firm of Gibraltar Mill Company); Nov. 14, at three, at two, 21. flice of Sol, Lloyd, Haverfordwest
Sol.. Friend, Exeter
lebone; Nov. 4, ut twelve, at office of Sol., Webster, Basing- the Elephant lun, St. Sepulchre-rate within, Doncaster. Sols,
Burdekin, Smith, and Pve.Smith, Shil
brewers, Tendring; Nov, 20, at eleven, at office of Sol., Smith, Nov. 9, at three, at office of Sol., Marshall, Aton-zarden
Sol., Moss, Grace church st
Liquidations by Arrangement.
Gazette, Oct. 24.
ham ; Nov. 13, at three, at 365, Tottenham-court-rd
at office of Sol., Wright, Sunderland
Hicks, Francis-ter, Victoria-pk, Bow
Cheapside, Hanley. Sol., Tennant, Hanley
at the Corn Exchange Hotel, Market-st, Exeter. Sol., Floud,
pool: Nov, 15, at three, at office of Sol, Nordon, Liverpool BROWN, WILLIAM FRASER, tobacconist, Carlisle; Nov, 13, at
eleven, at office of Sol., Thornburn, Carlisle BULLEN, JOTX, organ builder, Ipswich; Nov. 21, at twelve, at
office of Sol., Pollard, Ipswich BULL, JAMES PORTER, conch builder, Dewsbury; Nov. 13, at
three, at the Royal Hotel, Dewsbury. Sol., Ibberson, Dews.
bury CLARKE, ROHERT ROBINKON, chemist, Gateshead; Nov. 9, at
twelve, at office of Sols., Hoyle, Shipley, and Hoyle; Newcastle
upon Tyne COLLETT, WILLIAM, gentleman, Beaumont-st, Marylebone; Nov.
10, at three, at office of Sol., Montagu, Bucklersbury COVERDALE, WILLIAM, publican, Hartlepool; Nov. 15, at eleven,
of Sols, Buck and Dicksons, Preston
Gazeite, Oct. 20.
HENLY, THOMAS LARGE, fax scutcher, Calne
HARDING, JANTES WILLIAM, baker, High-5t, Stratiord BURNETT, Joux, Joiner, Sallord : Nov. 6, at half past two, at
Gazette, Oct. 24. office of Sol., Addlesha, Manchester BUSB, CLEMENT. ironfounder, Gloucester: Nov, 7, at twelve, at KERSLAKE, JOux, boot dealer, Buckingham Palace-rd, and High. office of F. G, Sherrard, Bristol
Gazette, Oct. 27.
DAGLISR. JAMES, furniture dealer, Providence-row, Finsbury,
and Brown'ow.ad, Dalston
BIRTHS, MARRIAGES AND DEATHS.
Sol.. Addleshaw, Manchester
CAMPBELL.-On the 25th ult., the wife of Bruce Campbell, Esq.. at office nf Sol., Risiny. Reading
(Barquharrie), of the Inner Lemple, barrister-at-law, of a son. COWLIN, JANE, milliner, Wigan; Nov. 15, at eleven, at offioc of
COOPER.--On the oth ult., at Woodridings, Pinner, the wife of SOL. Byrom, Wigan
Edward Brodie Cooper, Esq., 01 Lincoln's-inn, burrister-at-law, CROCKER, JOSEPH, kailmaker, Ramsgate; Nov. ?, at three, at
of a son. offices of Mercer and Mercer, Copthall-ct, Throgmorton-st.
MUNTON.-On the 30th ult., at 21, Montagu-street, Russell.sonure, Sol., Edwards
the wife of Francis Kerridge Munton, of 3, Old Fish-street-hill, CROWCROFT, REUBEX, joiner. Batley Carr, near Dewsbury; Nor
Queen Victoria-street, city, solicitor, of a daughter.
BADHAM.-On the 9th Sept., at Melbourne, aged 33, Mr. Lewis
Badham, of Torquay, second son of Mr. Badham, solicitor, DRAKE, FRANCIS EDWIX, architect, Hinkley, and Leicester: Nov Tewkesbury. 10, at twelve, at office of Sol., Kirby, Leicester
CHILD.-On Sunday the 22nd ult., at his father's house, Upper
twelve, at the Guildhall Coffee-house, Gresham-st. Sols.. of Andover.
CRUISE.--On the 25th ult., at Rahood, William Cruise, Esq., J.P.,
Rusholme, neur Manchester; Nov. 21, at three, at office of Sol., Esq., Q.C.
HACKING, -On the 18th Aug., at Kingsholme Lodge, Brisbane,
Tydfil; Nov, 6, at two, at office of Linton and Lewis, Merthyr JOHNSOS.-- On the 23rd ult., aged 58, William Johnson, of Great
aged 21, George, second and youngert sons of William Handeley GIRLING, SAMUEL JAMES, builder, Bromley-cottages, High-st, Podmore, solicitor, of 12, Union-court, Old Broad-street, LonBromley: Nov, 10, at three, at offices of Bath and Co., accoun.
don. tants, KingWliam-et. Sols., Bridge and Collins, King ROBOTHAM.-On the 27th ult.. at Derby, suddenly, aged 71, William-st, London-bridge
William Robotham, Esq., solicitor.
at West Hartlepool. Sols., Dobing and Simpson, West Hartle
pool DAVIES, CHARLES, cotton spinner, Oxford, within Ashton-under
Lyne; Nov. 11, at eleven, at office of sol., Clayton, Ashton
under-Lyne DAVIES, WILLIAM, sculptor, Carmarthen; Nov, 7, at two, at the
at office of Mr. Clennell, solicitor, Great Knight Rider-et,
Doctors' common Sol., Brandreth, Brighton
Head Inn, Worcester-st, Birmingham. Sul., Tennant, Hanley EDMONDS, EDMUND, woollen draper, Birmingham; Nov. 10, at eleven, at the George Hotel, Huddersfield. Sol., Griffin, Bir
mingham FARLEY, WILLIAM, grocer, Ramsgate : Nov. 14, at three, at office
of Moon, public accountant, Pavement, Finsbury HAGUE, BENJAMIN, provision 'dealer, Leeds; Nov. 10, at two, at
office of Sols., Rooke and Midgley, Leeds HANDCOCK, JÁYE ELIZABETH, spinster, Rose-cottage, New-rd, Hammesmith Nov. 22, at two, at offices of Ladbury, Collison,
and Viney, Cheapside. 8., Lewis and Lewis, Ely- Holborn HANDFORD, JAMES, confectioner, Duke-st. Portland.pl : Nov, 15, at three, at offices of Mr. Wagstaff, auctioneer, Upper-st, Isling.
ton. Sol., Elliott HINCHLIFF, JAMES, and TUNXAFCLIFE, HENRY, woollen cloth merchants, both Ruddersfield; Nov. 15, itt eleven,'at the Queen
hotel, Market-st, Huddersfeld. Sols., Messrs. Clough HINCHLIFE, JAMES, and TUYXACLIFFE, HENRY, Woollen cloth manufacturers, Huddersfield ; Nov. 16, at four, at office of Sols.,
Messrs. Clough, luddersfield
three, at office of Sols., Dunn and Payne, Frome
of Sol., Jones, Aberystwith
Sol, Hollinshead, Tunstall
Nov. 6. At two, at office of Mr. Picard, St. James's-st, Piccadilly
Sol, Burnend. St. James.st
eleven, at oftice of Sol., Bewley, Gravesend
two, at the Bear Inn, CowbridgeSol., Thomas, Pontypridd JOYXT, EVAX DUNHAM, out of business, Princes-rd, Notting hill;
Nov. 14, at two at office of Solo., Mesers. Mote, Warwick.ct,
Orders of Discharge.
TO SUBSCRIBERS. The volumes of the Law Times and of the Law TIMES REPORTS, are strongly and
uniformly bound at the office, as completed, for 58. 6d. for the Journal, and 4s. 6d.
for the Reports. Portfolios for preserving the current numbers of the Law Times, price 58. 6d., by
post, 5d. extra. LAW TIMES REPORTS, price 3s, 6d., by post, 3d. extra.
NOTICE. The LAW TIMEs goes to press on Thursday evening, that it may be received in the remotest
parts of the country on Saturday morning. Communications and Advertisements mus be transmitted accordingly. None can appear that do not reach the office by Thursday
afternoon's post. When payment is made in postage stamps, not more than 58. may be remitted at one time.
Tue disposition to discourage the enforcement of the payment of debts by debtor's summonses is not peculiar to our own courts. A law similar to our bankruptcy law prevails in Australia, and in August last, before Judg Noel, an attempt was made to obtain payment of a balance of a large sum for building three shops. It was submitted that as there were disputes, the debt was not of the simple character to which a debtor's summons should alone be held applicable. “Where," said the learned Judge, “the amount of the claim was moderate, where the evidence was not complicated, and where there were scarcely any points of law to decide, resort might be had to the Insolvent Act; otherwise the cause should be tried in the ordinary way in a court of law."
CON TEN TS.
We need only mention the changes which have taken place in the law offices of the Government by the elevation of Sir R. COLLIER to the Bench. The promotion of Sir Joun COLERIDGE and the appointment of Mr. JESSEL are colourless events so far as the Profession is concerned. There was little to choose as regards professional eminence between the various members of the Bar who were considered eligible for the Solicitorship, and it was wholly improbable that the man to become Attorney-General, namely, Sir ROUNDELL PALVER, would be placed over the head of Sir John COLERIDGE. Under the circumstances, therefore, no better appointments could have been made.
Will--Condition requiring residence
373 V.O. MALINS' COURT. TURNER . COLLINS
settlement by son in favour of father-
378 WBDGWOOD v. DENTONWM-Construction
379 COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. NEWALL v. TOMLINSON
Contract between brokers - Overpay.
382 COURT OF PROBATE. In the Goods of P. RICHARDSON
Administration- & Viot. c. 77, s. 73 384 In the Goods of P, B. HALL Will and cociicil.
384 HARRISOTON v. BOWER
'Testamentary suit-Plea of undue in.
23 The Liability of Directors of a Company
for Concealment in the Prospectus......... 24 LAW LIBRARY
24 NOTES OF THE WEEK :Court of Appeal ..
25 Rolls Court
25 V.C. Malins' Court. V.C. Bacon's Court Court of Queen's Bench. Court of Common Pleas Court of Exchequer Court of Probate Court of Admiralty ESTATE AND INVESTMENT JOURNAL Stock and Share Markets
99 Reports of Sales
28 SOLICITORS' JOURNAL: Notes of New Decisions.
29 THE BENCH AND THE BAR:
30 MAGISTRATES' LAW:Hammersmith Police Court
30 MARITIME LAW :Notes of New Decisions.
30 MERCANTILE LAW:
Notes of New Decisions
32 Dartford County Court
32 Woolwich County Court
33 BANKRUPTCY LAW :Notes of New Decisions
33 Brighton County Court.
33 LAW SOCIETIEN :
Incorporated Law Society of Liverpool 34 Solid Benevolent Association
35 Liverpool Law Students' Society Law Association
33 Hull Law Students' Society.
35 Articled Clerks' Society
33 THE COURTS AND COURT PAPERS:The Winter C.rcuits of the Judges
38 THE GAZETTES ........
30 BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, AND DEATHS
The appointment of Sir Robert COLLIER to the Privy Council is one which is entirely satisfactory to the Profession, much more so indeed than his appointment as a successor of Lord PENZANCE would have been. When this last-named change was mentioned it occurred to us that Government gives too little attention to the peculiarities of men's experience on elevating them to the bench. The greatest probate and divorce lawyer we have should be naturally selected for the Probate and Divorce Court, wholly regardless of political considerations, and much as we should have been gratified by the well-earned promotion of Lord PENZANCE, we conceive that it was a fortunate escape for his court that his promotion did not take place at this particular juncture. The process by which Sir R. Collier has been elevated to the Privy Council is of no
LEADING ARTICLES, &c.
TO READERS AND CORRESPONDENTS......... 19
19 A Barristers' Guild
21 A Couple of Legal Quarterlies
22 Married Women and the Municipal Fran. chise.
WE so fully stated the gist of Mr. McLeod's cause of action against the Digest Commission at the commencement of the suit, that it appears to us to be unnecessary to report the proceedings before the Arbitrator (Mr. DENMAN). That learned gentleman is now considering his award, and apparently has but two points to consider : (1) whether the contract was terminable before the completion of the branch of the digest entrusted to Mr. McLEOD, and, if so, whether it was terminable withont notice; and (2) in the event of it being held that the contract was not arbitrarily determinable by the Commissioners, what damages ought to be awarded? As to the question of notice, the arbitrator intimated that he thought that the Commissioners were bound to give fair and reasonable notice of the termination of the work. He also asked the counsel for the Crown whether he considered that damage was sustained by Mr. McLeod in not having his name published as the author of a successful digest of the law ? Counsel, in reply, said there was nothing about that in the contract, the only questions were whether the contract had been properly terminated, or whether it had been broken, and if it had what was the market value of Mr. McLeod's services ? For the applicant it was argued that 5001. a year was not a fair remuneration ; but that he was entitled to be paid for a ye r and threequarters' work at the rate of 20001. or 30001. per annum. He also alleged that he had suffered for the loss of credit, reputation, and honour which he would have gained by having his name published on the specimen digest. A Commission has been appointed in Canada for investigating the state of legal procedure in Ontario, and amongst other things it is proposed to consider the advisability of a fusion of law and equity. The members of the commission are Judge Wilson, Judge GWYNNE, Vice-Chancellor STRONG, Judge Gowns and Mr. PATTERSON, Q.C. Mr. GWYNNE, it appears, was a pupil of the late Lord Justice Rout, and the Canaila Law Journal speaks in high praise of all the members--of this gentleman, that his intimate
The Law and the Lawyers.
The appellate business in the Court of Bankruptcy, if all we hear be truc, seems to be conducted in a most extraordinary manner. By the Rules under tho Act of 1869 power is given to the SENIOR Registrar in attendance to sit for the Chief JUDGE (R. 210) during the absence of the latter “from any reasonable cause.” The fact that the CHEF JUDGE is also a Vice-Chancellor is always a “ reasonable cause" for his absence, and hence his place is generally filled by the Senior REGISTRAR. But appeals lie from the decisions of the registrars to the Chief JUDGE, and the result frequently is,
VOL. LII.-No. 1493.
knowledge of law and equity, practically as well as theoretically, especially fits him for the duty, and that he will enter upon it free from any supposed bias to either system. Of Vice-Chancellor STRONG, that no man is more competent to explain the theory and practice of that court which has been a witness to his intellectual power and great learning Of Judge Gowan—that he has long the confidence of, and given assistance to successive administrations in various ways, and has an increasing reputation, and that no one in Canada has a more intimate knowledge of the Division Court system, which is really the nearest approach at present to a fusion of law and equity; and that the reputation of Mr. PATTERson, at the Bar, is very high, that he is known to be a man with broad views of things, and of much learning and industry, and that he will be a most useful element in the commission. The Canadians are fortunate in having such men in their service.
common law, but within the district of the City of London Court if triable in Admiralty. And in the first place his Honour held that having regard to the above section, County Courts which have and those which have not admiralty jurisdiction, cannot exercise concurrent authority over the same class of cases. Then arose the question whether the cause was an "admiralty cause. Referring to the opinions of the Judges who decided Everard v. Kendall (22 L. T. Rep. N. S. 408), he observed that they expressed strong opinions--which, though obiter dicta, were entitled to weight --that the word "collision” in the Act of 1868 (sect. 3) means a collision between two ships. Mr. TAYLOR remarks upon the unsatisfactory nature of the arguments in Everard v. Kendall, the Bilboa (3 L. T. Rep. N. S. 338) being the only case cited, and the court being allowed to infer from that case that the Admiralty jurisdiction continued limited, as under the Admiralty Act of 1810, whereas the Malvina (6 L. T. Rep. N. S. 369) (affirmed in the Privy Council) decided that under the Admiralty Court Act of 1861 the Admiralty Court had the utmost extent of jurisdiction in cases of collision, and, as Mr. Taylor remarks, there is no reason why the County Court jurisdiction should be less extensive. That was a suit by a barge against a seagoing vessel, and on a plea being put in the jurisdiction, Dr. LUSHINGTON held that it must be struck out. The damage sustained in the case before Mr. Taylor having been inflicted by a yacht coming into collision with a row-boat, he held that the County Court had jurisdiction over the cause as an admiralty cause, and consequently that as the Woolwich court had not Admiralty jurisdiction, it should be tried in the City of London Court.
The prosecution of the attorney's clerk at Worship-street Police Court has terminated in his discharge. The charge, it will be remembered, was one of obtaining money by a false pretence, the pretence being that the defendant was an attorney's clerk. The merits of the case concern us little, but the conduct of the prosecution suggests some observations. We exonerate the solicitor whose clerk the defendant was said to be from desiring to do anything more than prove that he himself had no personal interest in the touting system. If he thought he had dismissed the clerk he can scarcely be considered responsible for the acts of the clerk after such supposed dismissal : and he was justified in instituting the prosecution if he believed that the clerk knew that he was dismissed. But from the line taken by the prosecuting counsel, and from the remarks made by Mr. HANNAY, it would seem that some attempt was made to drag into the inquiry the names of members of the Bar who had not the slightest connection with the subject matter. Such an attempt cannot be too severely condemned, and to bring out indirect charges against absent gentlemen who are unrepresented, even with the laudable view of checking irregular practices, is unfair, and savours of an unpleasant animus. But the attempt, if made, was unsuccessful, thanks to the firmness of the magistrate, and the clerk was discharged with the sanction of a silk gown. We must add, that it is very remarkable that not until one of Her Majesty's counsel was taken into the prosecution was it discovered that there was an ambiguity in the letter of dismissal. It is to be regretted that so important a point in the case was not attentively considered before the matter was brought before the public.
A DISCUSSION has been started in the medical press as to the future position of medical witnesses, or, as one journal expresses it, “ the relations of hospital surgeons to criminal law, and the moral position of medical witnesses.” A question was lately raised in a Crown prosecution in Dublin as to the admissibility of evidence to prove that a registered medical practitioner was not up to the proper educational standard. The CHIEF Baron gave judgment, which was in effect that evidence could not be received to show whether the operation was injudicious or not, but that evidence could be taken as to whether the operation was skilfully or unskilfully performed. The LORD CHEF Justice thought that evidence could not be taken either as to the judiciousness of the operation or the skilfulness of the modus operandi, but as when two judges differ the law leaned in favour of the prisoner, the LORD CHIEF BARon should rule the case. Consequently the surgeon who conducted the operation in question was put upon his trial, witnesses being called to give their view as to his possession of the needful qualifications, having regard to the way in which he had done his work. As Lord Chief Justice Bovill has said more than once in the Tichborne case “ it is better to admit than to exclude evidence,” and we are disposed to think that the LORD CHIEF BARON was right. The Medical Press and Circular sees no reason why “a medical man called upon for his opinion, on a given point, should hesitate to give full and faithful expression to it, because it might happen to be adverse to a mem• ber of his own profession.” It adds, “We are distinctly of opinion that reticence under such circumstances is an honourable quality, and we hope that when such emergencies arise, it will not be open to the public to say that personal pique or professional jealousy, or even political bias, have been served at the expense of our character for good fellowship and esprit de corps.”
On the 3rd inst. an important question was argued at the Kirkdale Quarter Sessions, before Lord DERBY, chairman of the county, Mr. Serjt. WHEELER, and other Justices, on an appeal by Mr. Hugu Cullen against a conviction of the appellant charging him with “having exposed in the Stanley cattle market, on the 14th Aug: last, certain cattle, the same being then and there affected with a certain contagious and infectious disease, to wit, the foot and mouth disease, contrary to the prohibition of the 57th section of the Contagious Diseases (Animals), Act 1869.” At the hearing in the court below, objection was taken by the attorney for the appellant to the jurisdiction of the justices to convict, on the ground that no summary jurisdisdiction to inflict penalties was contained in the Act. Counsel for the appellant urged the same objection. He argued that the 103rd section inflicted a penalty on persons guilty of an offence against the Act, but did not point out the method by which it was to be recovered, and there were no provisions in the Act declaring generally how, penalties were recoverable. The 4th section of the Act repealed all former Acts relating to the same subject. The 11 & 12 Vict. c. 107, the first Act, by the 8th section, expressly provided for the recovery of penalties in a summary manner. Three Acts relating to cattle diseases were passed in 1866: 29 & 30 Vict. cc. 2, 15, and 110; and one in 1867, 30 & 31 Vict. c. 125. In these Acts penalties are made recoverable on summary conviction under 11 & 12 Vict. c. 43 (Jervis's Act), ss. 30, 5, 10, 3, of the respective Acts. The omission of any such provisions in the present Act, implied it was argued, that the Legislature did not intend that the offence charged should be dealt with summarily, but that offenders should be proceeded against by indictment. “Justices could not acquire summary jurisdiction by implication, express words in a statute could alone confer it'; the 57th section, under which the conviction was made, enacted that any person exposing, &c., shall be deemed guilty of an offence against this Act, unless he shows to the satisfaction of the justices before whom he is charged that he did not know, &c. These words showed that it was the intention of the Legislature that the charge should be heard before some justices, but there was nothing to determine what justices were meant, how many were to act, whether they were to act at sessions or in a summary manner.
The 108th section gives a power of appeal to quarter sessions against any determination or adjudication of any justices with respect to any penalty, and it might be urged that this power impliedly conferred a jurisdiction on justices at petty sessions to inflict the penalties, but this appeal clause may be applicable to offences mentioned in the 104th section, for which justices have power to punish by imprisonment. Even if the justices had jurisdiction under the Act, they had no power to proceed under Jervis's Act for the penalties, as that Act did not apply to offences created by later statutes unless specially incorporated.”. Objection was also taken to the form of the particular conviction, as not being authorised by Jervis's Act, and bad on the face of it. For the respondents it was urged, that the Act would be nugatory unless the justices had the jurisdiction claimed, and that the intention of the Legislature to confer it sufficiently appeared from the language of sects. 57 and 108. A case of Reg v. Justices of Norwich was referred to, not to be found in any of the recognised reports, but a short report of it appeared in the Times of Feb. 1, 1870, where, no cause being shown, the court made absolute a rule nisi for a mandamus directing the justices to hear and determine a complaint under the 57th section of this Act. Mr. Justice BLACKBURN had, however, remarked, that the justices might get a short Act of indemnity passed as Parliament was about to open. After a very lengtheneck
Mr. Pitt Taylor, sitting at the Woolwich County Court, has had before him an important question relating to Admiralty jurisdiction, and in his judgment he has dealt somewhat roughly, but with no more roughness than was justifiable, with a case decided by the Common Pleas. In the first place he held that there could be no possible mistake as to sect. 5 of the Admiralty Jurisdiction Act 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 71), which enacts that so soon as a County
Court is appointed to have Admiralty jurisdiction, "no County · Court other than the County Court so appointed shall have jurisdiction within that district in any admiralty cause.” The action before his Honour was brought to recover damages for a collision, and it was within the district of his court if triable at