« EelmineJätka »
REAL PROPERTY AND tion (Limited) v. Overend, Gurney, and Company
(Limited), 25 L T. Rep. N. S. 813. Chan.)
BROMPTON COUNTY COURT.
Friday, Jan. 26. STATUTE OF DISTRIBUTIONS-Per STIRPES OR Sept. 1869, purchased in the course of business a
(Before F. ELLIS McTAGGART, Esq., Judge). PER CAPITA.-Tho grandchildren and great. cargo of maize, per vessel San Paolo, from Horne
BOYD V. LADY HASTINGS. grandchildren of an intestate, who dies leaving no and Co. On the same day they sold this cargo Domestic servant-Grounds for dismissal without children, take per stirpes: (le Ross's Trusts, to the defendant, and forwarded to him the usual 25 L. T. Rep. N. S. 817. V.C. W.) contract of sale. The price agreed to be paid by This was an action brought by the plaintiff, lately
notice-Accruing wages- Board wages-Costs. ESTATE IN COMPION IN TAIL MALT-CROSS. the defendant to James Pim and Co. was 9d. per
a footman in the defendant's service, for a wrongREMAINDER-DEVISE OVET. - A testitor device quarter more than they had agreed to pay to Horne his estates to his brother for life, after his de:ind Co. On the 4th (ct. James Pin and Co. paid dient's service on 30th May 1871, at the wages of
ful dismissal, The plaintiff entered the defen. cease to the brother's four sons, his nephews, for Horne and Co. by cheque, a deposit of £583 15s. on account of the said cargo, and on the same day
£28 per annum. life as tenants in common ; after their decease
He was paid a quarter's wages
on 30th Aug. and 30th Nov, respectively, and on the share or shares of his nephews rospectively James Pim and Co. drev on the defendant a bill to their respective eldest sous row living” for for £883 15s at three months. For the purpose 18th Dec., following, he was dismissed without life; after the decease of such eldest son's, the deposit, and to reinbarse themselves in the notice. The cla'm was for-first, wages between share or shares of such eldest sons, to the first and amount already paid by them, James Pim and Co. 30th Nov. and 18th Dec.; secondly, a month's other sons of each successively in tuil male. In discounted the bill with the Bank of Ireland, with wages in lieu of notice; and thirdly, a month's default of issue of the eldest soas, he devised whom they kept an account. After the arrival of board wages. It appeared that Lady Hastings on the same share or shares to the second, third, and the cargo, on or abont the 20th Nov., the defens 18th Dec. ordered the plaintiff to dust a sideboard other sons
now living” of his nephews severally dant instructeu James Pim and Co., as his brokers, iu the drawing room, which the plaintiff refused and successively, according to their respective to re-sell the said cargo on his account, and on
to do. The plaintiff said that the dining room seniorities, and to their issue in tail malo. Feiling that day they resold it to Coventry and Shep: dusted by a housemaid who left the defendant's
furniture had been, by the housekeeper's orders, the issue of the sons then living, he devised to all hard, of London. Coventry and purand every the sons of his said nephews" hereafter chased at a lower price than the original pur
service on 15th Dec., that the new housemaid to be born” in tail male. "And for delanlt of coase, but the difference being less than the would not dust the furniture, and that he (the such issne. I give and devise the same to my own deposit paid to Horne and Co., thev, on the 27th plaintiff) did not absolutely refuse to dust, the right heirs for ever, it being my will and intention Nov., being requested so to do by Jimes Pim and sideboard, when the defendant ordered him to do that the said lands shall go and remain in my closed the sale by taking up the decu nents directly so, but asked her lady-hip to allow him to explain name and family for ever, or as long as the law from Horne and
Co., paying them the balance due hand, witnesses for the defendant stated that the
first why the work was not done. On the other will permit such enjoyment of the same:” Held. to them from James Pim and Co., after the pay. that cross-remainders wero implied, and that the ment of the deposit as above-mentioned ; and this plaintiff twice absolutely refused to dust the side. shares of those nephews who, together with their payment left a balance in the hands of Coventry missed him, and that it was not till after his dis
board, that Lady Hastiugs then immediately dismale issue bad deccased, went to the surviving and Shephard of £115 10s. On the 2nd Dec. male issue of the other nephews, and not to the James Pin and Co. excented a deed of inspector: missal that the plaintiff said anything about testator's right heirs : (Hannaforil v. Hanna ford, ship assigning all their estate for the benefit making an explanation. 25 L. T. Rep. N. S. 820. Q. B.) of creditors, and the plaintiff's assented to the
Smythe for the plaintiff submitted that the PUBLIC NAVIGATION RIGHTS-IVCIDENTS TO
deed and proved under it for the amount plaintiff was entitled to recover wages up to the sucH RIGHTS OBSTRUCTION. - The owner of
of the bill. The defendant also filed his peti day of dismissal, and a month's wages in lieu of land on the bank of the lake of Ulles water builta
tion for arrangement with his creditors in the notice. He would admit that the claim for board Irish Bankruptcy Court on the zoth Dec. 1919,
wages could not be supported. pier partly on his own lan:) and partly on the soil
His HONOUR said that that was clearly so. of the lake, and granted to the deinauts a right and excuted a deed of arrangemen to which the plaintiffs assuntod, reserving all their rights to
Smythe contended that the plaintiff was wrong. of way, to, and the use of, the pier; The public the above-mentioned balances in the hands of fully dismissed. He had only requested to make have the right of navigation upon the lake. "The
no wilful refusal. plaintiff had succeeded in an action a minst the Coventry and Shephard. The trusters under this an explanation. There was
The work ordered was not the plaintiff's proper defendants for trespass, and it hal burun heli that deed declined to recognise the plaintiff's claim to he was the owner of the soil of the lake. The
a dividend until after the question raised by this work. In any case he onght to have his nages part of the pier built upon his soil became, thora.
case was dispose of The bill for £33 155. be- up to the day of dismissal, for he had done his fore, part of plaintiffs freehold. The defen.
came one on the 17th Dec. 1869 and was dis. work properly up to that day. dants' right of way to the pier conl not be used tits. The case fonnid that, had the firm of James defendant, said the dismissal was justified. The
kinysjorul (instructed by R. J. Patten) for the
and was, still plainexcept by passing over that pirt of the pier which vas on plaintiff's freehold, and the defendants Pim anl ('0. not suspendeil payment, they would order given to the plaintiff wits a reasonable one, continned to land and embark their passengers
have bern entitled, according to the regulier and private arrangements among the servants as course of business between them and the de.
to the distribution of work could not affect tho upon it. The plaintiff for six years allowed it to fandant, to have specifically applied the above remain as before, anil then brought this action for mentioned balance of the proceeds of the car o to
mistress's right to give the order. The plaintiff
refited to obey, citler absolutely, or until he had trespass in, causing persons to pas over his the taking wy of the bill in the kancis of the plain-made an explanation. In citier case the dis. pier: Held, that. this pier being an obstruction to the right of navigation, the faet that the pinintiff tiffs, and that it rould also have been in like miszal was justifiable: (Spain
v. Arnott, 2 Stark. did not himself erect it mado no difference to the idone
so, and have retired the bill. The defendant rightly dismissed, the plaintiff was not legally
mariner their duty towards the defendant to have 250 ; Turner v. Muson, 14 M. & W. 112.) If right of the public to use it reasonably, and that aimed to be entitled to receive the said balance entitled to be paid any wages for that portion of the action did not lio: (Marshall w. The sucate of the price of the cargo. James Pim and Co. time during which be had served since the last Steam Warigation Company, 25 L. T. Rep. N. S. maje ne claim for the amount, but the plaintiff's periodical payment of wages: (Jianley Smiths 793. Q. B.) contended that the sum should be applied pro
Law Master and Servant, 3rd edit. pp. 7, tanto in discharging and taking up the bill in
178.) their hands. Held, that the sum ought to be
His HONOUR.–There can be no donbt that a COMPANY LAW.
applied towards taking up the bill, and showd not refusal by a servant to obey a lawful order of his
bo naid over to the defendant. E parte Waring master justifies his dismiseal without notice. NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. (10 Ves. 315), and Porclus v. Hargreares (3 De G.
Here the order was lawful, and it does not appear M. & G. 430; 23 L. J. Ch.), observed upon and that the plai..tiff on entering Lady Hastings's Railway-NEGLIGENCE-CONTRIELTORY NEG. approved of : (The Bank ojo Ireland v. Perry, 25 service made any stipulation limiting the work LIGENCE.-- The plaintiff, being a passenger in a L. T. Rep. N. S. 845. Es.)
that he should have to do. There was some contrain of defendants, stood up in the carriage and
flict of evidence as to what took place, but, even put his hand upon the rou across the off window,
on the plaintiff's own statement, I should hold with the object of lookin: ont at the signal lights
that there was a disobedience justifying a diswhich they were approaching. The door flow open,
missal. For a servant has no right thus to qualify and the plaintif was precipitated upon the
bis obedience ; he ought to obey first, and explain ground, incurring thereby serious injury, for which
afterwards. Then, with respect to wages up to he brought his action : Hold, that the plaintitt's
NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS.
the day of dismissal, the question has been the proceeding was not improper, nox beyond the orili. INSURANCE - ASSIGNEE OF POLICY - BENE. subject of differences of opinion. But on the nary behaviour of a passenger, and that as it FICIAL INTEREST - Policies OF MARINE As atithority of Mr. Smith's book, referred to by the would not have been perilouz upon the presump. SURANCE ACT 1863, s. 11.-In an action by the learneu counsel for the defendant, and on general tion, which was reasonable, of the absench of ner. cxecutors of the assignee of a policy of assurance principles of law, I must decide that the plaintiff ligence on defendants' part. the evidence justitiei lupon gools shipped against undervriters of the is not legally entitled to any payment pro rati of the verdict of the plaintiff: (Gre v. Th. He'r). poliiy, the loss alleged being under the suing and wages between the last day of payment and the politan Ruilway Company, 25 L. T. Rep. N. S. 822. i labouring clanse, the declaration averred that day of dismissal. At the same timo i think it is Q. B.)
after loss, the said policy, together with all rights usual and fair, except under special circumstances, accrued under and he virtue thereof, was by the to pay & servaut's wages up to the day of
assured, for rood consideration, as inner to the dismissal. MERCANTILE LAW.
plaintiff's testator iu liis lifetime : lleld, upon Kingsford asked for costs, and assured His demurrer, that this declaration was good, although Honour tirat there were circumstances stated in
it contained no averment that ihe plaintiff's were his instructions that justilied Lady Hastings in NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. Bills OF EXCHANGE-ACCEPTORS-ACCOMMO- the insura:ice at the time of action brought : (Llore! beneficially interested in the subject matter of standing on her strict rights.
His lionour said it was not his usual practice DATION BILLS-PRINCIPAL AND SURETY-DIS. v. Fieminy, 25 L. T. Rep. N. 5.824. Q. B)
to allow costs in similar cases, but he must du so CHARGE OF SURETY.-A. accepted four bills of ex.
as it was pressed. change for B. &ta commission of 4 per cent. The bills were discounted by C., P. guaranteeing with C. to pay them at maturity. B. afterwards re
BREAKFAST.- Epps's COCOA-GRATEFUL AND COMFORTquested C. not to press for immediate payment of ING.--" By u thorough knowlane of the Datural laws
EAST STONEHOUSE COUNTY COURT. the bills on arriving at maturity, and it was acwhich goveru the operacious of lige-tiou and uutrition.
(Before M. FORTESCUE, Esq., Judge.) and by a curefui aplication of the fiue pro erties dit cordingly arranged that they should be held over vell.selected cocon, Ir. Ejupon has provided our break
THE ROLEET L. LANE. during the currency of certain other bills which B. fast tulides with a delicately.slavourel leveruse which
Towige-rrest - Jurisdiction. had deposited with C. as additional sceurity. Held,
may save na wan heavs dictor's bills." - Ciri Seonice Tue facts of the case appear to be these: In the that there was a binding contract on the part of C.
(102tte. Made simply with Briling water or Milk Each to give time to B., and therefore that A. Was dis: ! packet is labelievl-JA ES Errs and Co., Ilowpoparliie voar 1867 the ship kubert L. Lone was at Liver:
Chemists, London," charged as surety : (Oriental Financial Corpora. Cocoa Coco illud Condenseu Milk).
AS.), makers of Epps's Milky pool, and whilst there towage services to the
extent of 1001. were rendered to her by the United
Steam Tag Company of that port. The vessel | only to necessaries, in which the word towage does statute did not begin to run until that duty had left Liverpool without paying this money, and not come.
been discharged, which was not until June 1868, antil within a few days since the company, who Elmonds.--Bnt towage means salvage.
when the balanco had been obtained from Farraday, noir appeared before the court in the character of After some further arguments, his HONOUR and the bills carried in and taxed, and payment plaintiff, were unable to obtain any information repeated that he had carefully gone into the matter; obtained as far as it could extend. as to her whereabouts. The newspapers, however, he liad come to the conclusion that the arguments His HONOUR, having taken time to consider, having rently given particulars of an accident of Mr. Wolferstan did not apply to the present case, said he was of opinion that the retainer in this which happened to the Robert L. Lane off the and that he must discharge the order for arrest. case, if it involved any personal liability at all, Start, and the company having also ascertaineid Wolierstan.-I must give notice of my intention was exhausted when the order of discharge was that the ship was in Plymouth Sound, Mr. Joseph to appeal against your Honour's decision, because obtained in Nov. 1862, and that as to the charges Corkhill, the manager, at once came to Plymouth, it is really a matter of importance to my clients. on that account, which amounted to £15 28. 4d., and male an athidavit, resulting in the issue of a Elmonis.-You have no power of appeal. the Statute of Limitations, vas a defence. The warrant on the authority of the judge of tio His HONOUR.-Never mind whether they have object of the retainer was then accomplished, and County Court, to detain the vessel, and to pre- or not. If they have I hope they will avail them if the solicitor had intended to rely on this per: rent ber proceeding on her voyage until the claim selves of it.
sonal liability of the defendant he was entitled of the plaintiff's had been satisfied.
The order to release the ship was then given, then to deliver and demand payment of his bill, R. G. Elmonels, however, now made an applica and the men in charge by the authority nfl and the statute began to run from that time. For tion for the discharge of the ship, on the ground the court were withdrawn from her during the this ruling the case of Rothery v. Nincing il B. & that at the present time she was the property of afternoon.
Ad. 15) appears to be an authority expressly in American owners, having been seized an i soli at
point. As to the subsequent charges the case New Bedford, in the United States, in order to
SKIPTON COUNTY COURT.
rests on different grounds. In Rotlery v. Mincing repay a bottomry bond upon her.
the plaintiff recovered for the items of charge The master of the Robert L. Lane, Jonathan (Before W. T. S. DANIEL, Q. C., Judge.) which wero within the six years, but in that Cowan, was called, and he stated that at the time
ROBINSON'S EXECUTORS v. WALKER.
case there could be no doubi that the original the services were rendered, in respect of which
retainer involved the personal liability of the the company now sought to detain her, she was Statute of Limitations-''hen it begins to un client, and the subseqnent itens had reference to an English ship, tho property of English owners,
against an attorney's bill--Retainer-When it his interest and not the interest of the proctor. and carrying the English fing, but since that she
ceases--that it authorises.
In this case the subsequent items had reference was, as Mr. Edinonds had stated, sold by the H. D. Robinson for plaintiffs.
to the interest of the solicitor in securing a fund anthority of the Admiralty Court in America in discharge of a bottomry bond. He added that for
Shaw, instructed by Geo. Robinson, Skipton, for for payment of his costs, and not to the interest defendant.
of the defendant. And having reference to the nearly three years after the sale she lay by the
This action was brought by the executors of the nature of the employment, and the relative şide of the dock at New Bedford, in disuse, but late Mr. Henry Robinson, of Settle, solicitor, to position of the parties, I am satisfied that the just over a year ago she was purchased by her
recover £8 125., the balance of a bill of costs, solicitor transacted the business upon the credit present owners, and witness was put in command of her. He himself took the necessary steps for
under the following circumstances : In July 1962, of the fund, and not npon the personal liability of
the defendant, a market gardener, retained the the defendant. Judginent will, therefore, be transferring her fag from the register of the deceased, as his sclicitor, to file his petition and entered for the defendant, with the usual costs. English Court to the register of the American obtain his discharge under the Bankruptcy Act Court.
1861. This was done, and the order of discharge On the other hand, it was asserted by Polfer.
was obtained in Nov. 1862. Jolin Farraday was stan, who apperred for the Liverpool Tug Com; appointed creditor's assignee, and he was the only
BANKRUPTCY LAW. pany, that in the month of Feb. 1867 the vessel creditor who proved under th“ bankruptcy. The had the words “ New York” pairtol on her stern, estate realised by him amounted to £28 53. 11d., and that at that time she actually belonged to
MR. DANIEL ON PROCEEDINGS IN ont of which, after paying rent due to the land. America.
LIQUIDATION. lord, and the high bailitt's charges, there remained on the oth ult, the learned jndge of the Bradford Elmons.--We can telegraph to Liverpool, and a balance of £9 19s. 1d. This sum he improperly by tomorrow afternoon at two o'clock we can receive an office copy of the register of this vessel,
retained in his own lianda. Ho ought to have paid County Court made the following observations on it into court, that it might have been applied in
the working of the Bankruptcy Act as regards and if we satisfy your Honour that at this time be clearly entitled to your judgment. We had no ' bound to look to the estate for payment of his she was registered in Liverpool I think we shali parment of the defendant's solicitor's costs up to proceedings ja liquidation, and the jurisdiction the order of discharge. The solicitor, if not exercised under soct. 72, with especial reference
to the case of Ec yurte Calvert, which we publish idca that Mr. Wolferstan intended to oppose the costs, found it was his interest to do so, and he
to-day :discharge to-say. cil. He did not deliver his bill to the defendant suggested to me the propriety of making some
The case which I have just disposed of has Fuerstin. - But Mr. Edmonds is taking corno. thirs for yranted which I cannot almitivni that applied to Faraday to file his accounts as
or :!ly to him for payment. but in 1857, having observations upon a practice disclosed by some of is, that if the vessel be registered at Iverpool, innen, ni l'urradar having nelectei, be an.
tho proceediogs in it, which I consider to be un. she is therefore entitled to be discharged. I say Yo, and that you have rativity to diction binareonnin. This oriler was made. The account and calculato? to end to abuses in procenilings
print, this court for an oriler on Farrailar to fila warranted by the rules and forms in bankruptcy, her, inasmuch is she is ring away froin this country, and we cannot fall back upuil her after clered to be paid by Farrales, with the cost printing his own name and the name of his clerk
was in time filel. and the balance, £9 198. ld., I allude to the practice of the debtor's attorney
hy liqnilation injurions to the interest of creditors. varils
of the proceeding occasioned by his neglect. His HONOUC.-If you mean that I have the The balance wils paid into court, and the solicitor's in the form of proxy, which he delivers to the power to arrest, in conseque:ce of things that have
costs against Farraday were brought in and taxed,
registrar to be scale and posted by him to credi. subsequently taken place, a ship that I had no but the amount has not been paid, it appearing I notices are not accompanied with any stat ment
tors with notice of the first meeting. power to arrest at the time these services were that Farraday has become insolvent. In June of debts or assets, creditors are often without supplied, I must say that I do not agree with
18:18 the solicitor brought in three bills of costs you. Wolferstan.-My contention is, that you have registrar. Bill No. 1, costs to choice of assignee, notice which comes to them under the seal of the
any means of judging how their interests may be
in the bankruptcy, which were taxed by the affected by tho liquidation, but finding tipon the the power to arrest at any time, no matter where £9 63. 41., taxed at L7 158. 60.: bill No. 2, costs the ship was registered. His Honour.-I do not think you quite under £5 6s. 8d., taxed at £3 163. 6d. ; bill No. 3, order debtor's attorney and of his clerk, proposed as from choice of assignee to the last meeting, court, that a form of proof and pro..y will be found
on the third side, and in that proxy the name of the stand Mr. Edmonds' point. He says she was a
of discharge and subsequent attendance, British ship with British owners, and that even at
proxies.creditors 42 195. 61., taxed at £2 25. 21. The funds then the court sanctions ani suggests the appointment
be misled into the belief that the time this toware was supplied, there was no in court amounted to £10 163. 21., and on the of these persons'as proxies, and be led to sign the power to arrest in this court, and further, that as
23rd June 1858 the solicitor received £7 153, 6d. soon as she has changed owners, a power of arrest in discharge of bill No. 1; £2 23. 2d. in di-charge that the debtor is better enabled, with the aid of
proxy under that belieť. By such means is obvious cannot be created in respect of a lien which did
of bill No. 3. und 185. 6d. on account of bill No. I friendly creditors, to carry at the first meeting a pot exi-t before the change. It was then arranged that the case should stand Thus matters stood up to the death of the by an abuse of the 302nd rule, a resolution for his
2. leaving L2 185. duo on account of that bill. resolntion for an inadeqnate composition, or even, over until two o'clock the following afternoon, in solicitor, which occnrred subsequently to June immediate discharge. Vot many months after the order that a t'le ram might be sent to Liverpool 1869. On the 5th June 1871 the plaintiffs, as for an office copy of the ship's register.
the executors of the solicitor, delivered to the firm of solicitors in Bradford called the attention
Act of 1869 came into operation, a member of a On the following dar, jorsten said he would admit that she was a charges for tho business comprised in the four he haud received, and objected to it, as being not
defendant a signed bill containing continuous of t'ie registrar to a form of this character which Priti-i revistered vessel, but at the same time he taxed bills, as from July 1862 to June 1868, thought he was in a position to prove, even with anounting to £19 183. 24., and treating the sum of only injurious to creditors, but also an unprothat fact adınitted, that his Ilinour had juris. 910 165.21., the amount rrceived out of court, as
fessional mode of soliciting business, and the diction. His Honour.:-I am quite certain that it is not leaving the balance of £S 12s., the sum now a sim to be credited against the £19 185. 20., registrar was requested to refuse to send and pust
such notices. But the registrar, thongh feeiing I rempaineil here for som timo yesterday for suught to be recovered.
the force of the objection, did not consider himself the purpose of inquiring into that very point.
justified in acceding to such a request on his own oferston. I have also be into the cases,
Shav, for the defendant, relied upon the Statute anthority. Some time afterwards, the matter was and I would call rour Honours attention to this, of Limitations (which had been specially pleadei) brought to my attention, and having the proceed. that the 3 & Viet. c. 45,8..", gives the High business done more than six years ago, that is up being satisfied that the prutice was not warrantid
as a defence to so much of the bill as related to incs in the case just crisposed of before me, and Court of Aliniralty jurisdiccion " to decide all claim; and riemals whatever in the nature of to Nov. 1902 when the order of discharge was by the rules or forms, and was one which might talveze rencle red to or damage received by any obtained. This amountar to £1.5 23. 41., and as
tend to the injury of creditors, I gave a written chip or seag ving re: 0), or in the nature of tow. to the residue that the business was not done in direction to the reazjutrar, which was made public, are, and also for necessaries to any foreign ship the rainer of the defendant, hnt pas done by not to receive in liquidation proceedings, for the or sengoing vessel.' Previon to that Act the the solicitor in his own interest, in order to secure
purpose of being sealed or posted, any notices Admiralty ha-l no right to entertain any claim for a fund in court, to which aloue he looked for pay of first meeting in which either the ainount or turtage.
ment. Then again, the 24 Vict. c. 10 says:
consideration for the debt or the names of "The High Court of Admiralty shall have juris. H. D. Robinson, in reply, insisted that the original | the proxy shall not be in blank. That direction dition over any claim for necessaries 'supplied to retainer was not exbansted when the order of dis has been since followed here, anal has, I believe, any -bip elsewhere than in the port to which she charge was granted, but it was the duty of the I been followed in some other courts. I am aware belong, unless it is shown to the satisfaction of solicitor towards the defendant to take the various | how little this court can do to prevent abuse in the court that at the time of the institution of proceedings, subsequently, to
fund such matters, but what little it can I consider it the canse any owner or part owner of the ship is in court in order to relieve the defendant from ought to (1o, especially is complaints ar, mulo domiciled in England or Wales.” That is confined' liis continuing personal liability, and that the aud dissatisfaction is sometimes loudly, and per
haps justly, expressed as to the working, in some Courts of England and Ireland,” published in the 8514 Is. 9d. should be accepted in satisfaction respects, of the Act of 1869. For the manner in Times of the 4th inst., the public are unofficially of the debts, and that the security of James which the judicial and administrative functions of informed that the result of the labours of the Helliwell should be accepted for such com. his court are discharged, a judge may be con. Judicature Commission as to the higher tribunals position. On the 7th Nov. this resolution was sidered responsible, at least to the extent of omit. will not be immediately brought under the atten- duly confirmed, and one John Routh appointed by ting no duty which I am able to perform, and per- tion of the public-in plain words, that the revi. the creditors as their trustee for the receipt and mitting no abuse which I have power to prevent. sion of our judicial system in England, including distribution of the composition, when paid, upon But for abuses which creep in through, the supine. | these plebeian tribunals, must wait for a more con- the statement of assets required to be furnished ness indiscretion, or misplaced confidence of cre. venient season. In any reasonable delay there by Edward Helliwell, under the head of consign. ditors, they alone must be responsible. As we have will, I think, be much advantage. For the writer ments, to the present petitioners, Paul, Williams, now completed the second year of the operation of of the paper referred to does not perceive or fails and Co., after stating that they held goods belong. the Bankruptcy Act, and are just entering upon to recognise the important difference to suitors in ing to him amounting to £1837, on which certain the third, it has occurred to me that there are these courts between limited and unlimited juris. advances had been made, and that a sum of £284 two matters to which public attention may be diction. It has occurred upon several occasions may be expected to be realised in favour of his usefully directed. 1. As to the number of peti. on this circuit since I have sat as judge that estate. At this time, James Helliwell, against tions, and the relative proportions of bankruptey | justice has been denied to a plaintiff through its whom the motion is made, was an unsecured creand liquidation. From the comptroller's return, appearing by the evidence that the limit of juris. ditor for £1025. He had offered, and the creditors laid before Parliament last session, it appears diction was exceeded. I will select two instances had accepted, his guarantee for the payment of that for the year ending 31st Dec. 1870, there are that struck mo strongly : In one case in equity the composition of 4s. in the pound, amounting 6046 petitions presented ; of these 1758 were where a conveyance absolute upon tho face of it to £1708 188., and on the 10th Nov., two days petitions for adjudication in bankruptcy, and was sought to be reduced to a mortgage, with a before the registration of the second resolution, a 4288 petitions for liquidation by arrangement or view to redemption, the case of the plaintiff deed of assignment was executed by Edward composition, the proportion of the latter to the was put out of court by it being shown by Helliwell, conveying the whole of his estate and former being about two and a half to one. From incontrovertible evidence that the value of effects to James Helliwell, under which posses. the entries in the Gazette for the year ending Dec. the property comprised in the deed was 5201., sion was taken by him; he afterwards, according 1871 (and which I take from the lists published in the limit being 5001. In another case,
to the terms of the resolution, duly paying the the Weekly Notes of Dec. 30), the total number of action for disturbance of an easement by the sum he had guaranteed. The deed recites the petitions is 7842, being an increase over those owner of the dominant tenement against the fact of Edward Helliwell having petitioned the of the year 1870 of nearly 30 per cent. Of owner of the servient tenement, the latter proved court for the liquidation of his affairs by arrange. these 7842 petitions, 945 only were petitions that the annual value of his tenement was 217.158, ment, or composition, the resolutions passed by for adjudicution in bankruptcy, and 6609 are the limit of value of either tenement being 201. the creditors to accept 4s. in the pound in dis. petitions for liquidation, the proportion of the No doubt in each of these cases the plaintiff de charge of their claims, amounting to £8541, and Iatter to the former being about 7 to 1 against 21 feated here might seek his remedy in the Superior that, in consideration of such guarantee having to that of 1870. These facts seem to demonstrate Court, but in each caso it happened that the been given by James. Helliwell, and the pay. that, under the Act, the winding.up of insolvent plaintiff was poor, and neither plaintiff could ment of the sum required, he, Edward Helliwell, estates is drifting rapidly from bankruptcy into afford to purchase justice at the price he would assigns absolutely to him all his estates liquidation ; and as, under liquidation, the debtor have had to pay for it in Lincoln's.inn or West and effects of every kind whatsoever. On these has the initiation of the proceedings, and the minster Hall. The one asked for bread, the law facts it is contended, on behalf of She claimants in control of the time and place for holding the first offered him a stone; the other asked for a fish, the this case, that the declaration contained in the meeting, if through supineness, indiscretion, or law offered him a scorpion. No such violation petition for liquidation filed by Edward Helliwell
, misplaced confidence on the part of creditors, tho of Magna Charta can ever occur in these courts that he was unable to pay his debts, was an act of debtor is enabled to procure resolutions to be passed urder their
bankruptcy jurisdiction. That being bankruptcy, and that James Helliwell having had in his favour to their prejudice, the court can. unliınited, justice can never be denied. The judge notice of this, as the recital in the deed of not be held responsible. Evidence was given last may be at times—often, it may be-in fault; but as signment shows he had, it was a contract and session before the House of Commons'committee on the corrective is at hand in an appeal, at 'once dealing with respect to the disposition of pro. the Tribunal of Commerce, by Mr. Rupert Kettle simple, inexpensive, expeditious, and efficient. perty by the bankrupt which, eren, if made (a County Court judge of much larger and more Any reasonable delay in measures of law reform in good faith, and for valuable consideration was varied experience than I possess), to this effect. which shall serve to prove to the public the bene. invalid, having been made at the time when he, In answer to question 1609, he says, “In the fits derivable from the unlimited exercise of this James Helliwell, had notice of an act of bankBankruptcy Law in matters which are called jurisdiction by properly constituted local courts ruptcy. And it was also further contended that, liquidation and arrangement, they should, I need not be the subject of regret.
supposing that the statement in the petition for think, be under the authority of some public
liquidation was not an act of bankruptcy, the contribunal. I do not think the control should be left
veyance by Edward Helliwell of all his estate and to what may happen at a meeting of the creditors
effects was in itself such, and having been comwhere proxies are admitted. I find that the law is
DEWSBURY BANKRUPTCY COURT.
mitted within twelve months from the date of the systematically, I will not say abused, but that
Thursday, Jan. 25.
adjudication, there was relation back under sect. 11 rogues avail themselves as freely of the law now (Before Serjeant TINDAL ATKINSON, Judgc.) for twelve months, and the assignment of the 18th as they did before the passing of the last Act of
Nov. was brought within the second sub-section Parliament. There is nothing to prevent the
of sect. 6, and was an act of bankruptcy as being buying of proxies, and there is nothing to prevent
Act of bankruptcy.
a fraudulent preference, and having the effect to making promises of some future advantage if the A petition in liquidation en ling in composition delay creditors. With reference to the first point proxies are given. I find that the system of
with creditors, which has been duly carried out liquidation is open to as great abuses as deeds of
under the provisions of the Bankruptcy Act 1869, debts, contained in Edward Helliwell's petition for
-viz., was the declaration of inability to pay his arrangement under the Act of 1861.” How far
Part VII., is not an act of bankruptcy: nor liquidation an act of bankruptcy ?-I am clearly of this evidence may accord with the experience and is an assignment of the whole of the debtor's opinion that upon the facts in this case it was not
. judgment of others having equal means of obser
effects made for the purpose of raising the money vation, I know not. But if the conclusions are
to pay the composition which was in fact paid no doubt decides that such a petition was an
The case of Re Tims (Weekly Notes, 1870, p. 71), accurate, they have an important bearing upon the
by such means, an act of bankruptcy. fact disclosed by the Gazette entries of the C'arter, Leadenhall.street, London, for the peti. that the affairs of the petitioner should not be
act of bankruptcy, but then the creditors resolved year 1871, namely, the large increase in the tioning creditors and trustee in bankruptcy. liquidated by arrangement, and presented a peti. number of these proceedings, and their increased Pullan, Leeds, for James Helliwell, the assignee tion under sect. 6, praying that the debtor might be proportion to bankruptcies, and creditors thus of the debtor's effects,
adjudicated a bankrupt, alleging that the debtor warned must be on their guard. The other The facts and authorities are fully set out in had filed a petition according to Form 106, which subject to which I propose to refer is the the following judgment:
contained an allegation that he was unable to pay jurisdiction conferred by the 72nd section of His Honour said : This case comes before me his debts. The Chief Judge held that the rule 267 the Act of 1869, and the effect of its operation in the by way of motion made on behalf of the petition was decisive on the question, as under that rule the int:rest of suitors. This jurisdiction, as the sec. ing creditors, James Harrison Paul and Howard court, in the event of any neglect on the part of tion has been expounded by decisions of the ap: Douglas Williams, for an order to compel one the creditors to pass a resolution that the debtor's pellate courts, is unlimited and exclusive as to all James Helliwell, the uncle of the bankrupt, to affairs should be liquidated by arrangement, rights and interests in property which affect the forth with deliver up to the trustee of the property might, on the application of any creditor, make an winding.up. of estates of insolvents, which have of the bankrupt an account in writing, verified by order of adjudication and direct the bankruptcy to be administered here. This court is therefore, affidavit, of all the estate and effects of the
bank- to bo proceeded with. But it must be observed to the extent of that jurisdiction, a court of first rupt taken or received by or assigned to him, that the present case differs materially from that, iustance, and where that jurisdiction is exercised, James Helliwell, under a deed dated the 10th Nov. inasmuch as here the composition has been ac. suits in equity and actions at law are rendered 1870, and that the said James Helliwell shali cepted by the creditors, has been sanctioned by unnecessary, and can be prevented by the party within a short time, to be named by the court, the court, and has become in law a perfected sued. The delay and expense which are unavoid. deliver up to the said trustee all such estate and transaction ; the registration of the resolutions, able in the Superior Courts, are unknown here. effects which shall not have been sold, collected, in the absence of fraud being conclusive, that all The cases that arise aro raised upon a notice of or converted into money by him; and lastly, that the requisitions of the Act in respect of such resomotion, are investigated fully, the litigants when he is to be ordered to pay to the said trustee all lutions have been complied with. It appears to ever necessary or desirable are confronted, and such moneys and debts 80 received or got in by me that the language of the 26th section, part 7, they and their witnesses examined in open court, him, together with the proceeds of all such pro of the Bankruptcy Act was framed
expressly to all necessary documents are produced without perty and effects as may have been so sold, realised, meet the case of a debtor, who, by accident or hesitation or difficulty, affected excuses for delay or converted into money. The facts and dates, misfortune, had fallen into difficulties, and who, are rarely if ever made, the legal bearings of the so far as they are material to the decision of this by satisfying his creditors that he was acting case are sifted and carefully examined with zeal caso are, that previous to the 7th Oct. 1870, the with good faith in the distribution of his assets, and ability by the advocates (counsel or attorney), bankrupt Edward Helliwell was in embarrassed and that the costs of a bankruptcy would be the decisions are given promptly, and every order circumstances, and petitioned the Leeds Bank. avoided by the acceptance by them of a composi: made is open to appeal. As the beneficial results ruptcy Court' on the 7th Oct., under the 125th tion. In such a case they might resolve that of this system go on increasing year by year, section of the Bankruptcy Act 1869, for liquida- without any proceedings in bankruptcy, such comit is not, I trust, a vain hope, that though by tion by arrangement or composition, such peti position should be accepted in satisfaction of the slow, yet by sure degrees, the public and tho pro- tion containing, according to the Form 106, a debts due to them from the debtor. Proceedings fession will arrivo at an appreciation of its valuo, declaration that the petitioner was unable to pay in bankruptcy are, therefore, by the resolutions and in due time co-operate for its extension, it his debts. A general meeting of the creditors, passed and registered in this case, expressly being borne in mind that the merits of the system convened by notice, was held on the 26th Oct! excluded, and if I were to hold that any step are intrinsic, and wholly independent of the ex: 1870, and the stotutory majority of the creditors taken in the preliminary stages, such as filing ternal accident of the quality of the staff, judicial present passed a resolution that a composition this petition in liquidation, was an act of bank: or adininistrative.
of 4s, in the pound, payable at threo and six ruptcy, I should, in my own view of the From an important paper headed “ The County months, described in the list, amounting to scope and object' of the section, be acting
in direct contravention of the statute. I am, fire of thirty-eight of the bales. In respect of
LEGAL NEWS. therefore, clearly of opinion that the first those thirty-eight bales, a sum of 7601. became point-that an act of bankruptcy available for ad. payable under the policy, and after it had become judication, committed by Edward Helliwell on the payable as all the parties well knew, namely, on
THE NEW SHERIFFS. 6th Oct. 1870-contended for, fails. Then as to or about the 7th May, the debtors delivered and in.
(From the Gazette of Tuesday.) the assignment of the 10th Nov., which conveyed dorsed the policy to Rome and Co., undoubtedly in At the Court at Osborne House, Isle of Wight, to James Helliwell the whole of the assignor's breach of the equitable rights of Stuart ; and Mur: the 5th day of February, 1872, present- the property, being an act of bankruptcy under sect. phy's statement of the arrangement under which Queen's most excellent Majesty in Council : 6, sub-sect. 2, as being a fraudulent conveyance, this deposit was made, differs from that of Rome Sheriffs appointed by Her Majesty in Council gift, delivery or transfer of the debtor's property, and Co., Murphy asserting that the deposit was to for the year 1872:I am of opinion that in this transaction, no fraud secure advances then intended to be made by Rome
ENGLAND was committed or contemplated either by James and Co. to meet the acceptances of the liquidating
(Excepting Cornwall and Lancashire.) Helliwell or by Edward Helliwell. The considera- debtors in respect of the cotton in question, which tion for the advance of the composition and the advances never were made, whilst Rome and Co. house, Esq.
Bedfordshire.-William Francis Higgins, of Turvey. recital of the then pending proceedings in the say that the deposit was intended to cover any Berk-hire.--Sir Nicholas William Throckmorton, of Leeds Bankruptcy Court, which are fully set out balance of account due, or to become due to them. Buckland-house, Bart. in the deed, possession also having followed out, It is not necessary, in the view I take of the case,
Bucks.- Richard Rose, of The Chesnuts, Aylesbury, and no concealment having been used, there is, as to decide this disputed question ; but if I was
Esq. it seems to me, a complete absence of any circum- called upon to do so, I should have great difficulty George Fitzwilliam, of Milton-park, Northamptonshire.
Cambridgeshire and Huntingdopshire.– The Hon. stance which would bring it within the 13 Eliz. in reconciling the statement now made by Rome Cheshire.-Egerton Leich, of Jodrell-ball, Esq. cap. 5, as being a fraudulent deed or aliena and Co., with the terms of their letter to the Cumberland.-George Moore, of Whitehall, Esq. tion, having for its immediate object to de. debtors of the 18th June, in which they say they Derbyshire. - Thomas William Evaus, of Allestreefeat creditors. The cases of Rose v. Haycock have only a margin of about 2001., and they re
hall, Esq. (1 Ad. & Ell. 460), Pannell v. Reynolds (11 C. B. quest payment of that amount as a security
Devonshire.-John George Johnson, of Cross, Esq.
Dorsetshire.-Edward Joseph Weld, of Lulworth N. S. 709), Mercer v. Patterson (L. Rep. 3 Ex. against any further decline, making no allusion to Castle, Esq. 106), Lomar v. Buxton (40 L. J. 150,* C. P.), the alleged fact that they had any lien or claim Durhain.-Rowland Burdon, of Castle Eden, Esq. establish that a boni file sale by a trader of upon the policy then in their hands or its proceeds; Essex.-Thomas Kemble, of The Hall, Runwell, Esq. the whole of his effects for an equivalent which whereas at that very time, if what they now state Gloucestershire -Sir William Vernon Guise, of El. is paid to a bankrupt, and with which he may be true, they had a margin of upwards of 7001. as
more-court, near Gloucester, Bart, deal, is not an assignment within the rule they prove in the proceeds then payable of the Brockhampton, Esg.
Herefordshire.-John Habiogton Barneby Lutley, of which makes an assignment an act of bankruptcy, policy. On the 16th July 1870, the debtors wrote Hertfordshire.- Thomas Curtis, of The Hall, Great where it necessarily puts it out of the power of the to Rome and Co. to demand the return of the Berkhampstead, Esq. bankrupt to continue his trade. And in a late policy, and gave notice to the insurance company Kent.-Sir John Frederick Croft, of Doddington, case, Re Colemere (L. Rep. Ch. 128), it was held not to pay the proceeds to Rome and Co., or to
Bart. that an assignment by a trader of all his property anybody save to them or their order. On the 21st Wistow.lull, Bart.
Leicestershire.- Sir Henry St. John Halford, of as security for an advance of money, which he of that month the debtors filed their petition for Lincolnshire. - Sir Robert Sheffield, of Normanby. afterwards applied in payment of existing debts, liquidation of their affairs, and subsequently to the park, Bart. was held not necessarily fraudulent within the filing, and after notice of it both to Rome and Co. Monmouthshire.-James Cbarles Hill, of The Brooks, meaning of the Bankruptcy Acts. In order to and Stuart and Co., Rome and Co. endorsed and Abergavenny, Esq. make such an assignment fraudulent, the lender delivered the policy to Stuart and Co., of Man.
Norfolk. - William Angerstcir, of Weeting-hall, Esq. must be aware that the borrower's object was to chester upon payment by them of the debt now
Northamptonshire.- Henry Osmond Nethercote, of
Moulton-grange, Esq. defeat or delay his creditors and such an assign. due to Rome and Co. from the liquidating debtors, Northumberland.-Roddam John Roddam, of Rod. ment cannot be an act of bankruptcy, unless it is namely 2001., and 51. for interest. Stuart and dam, Esq. also void as being fraudulent. But how can it be Co. have received the whole proceeds of the Nottinghamshire.--George William Mason, of Mor. said that there was any intention here to defeat or policy, 7601., and they now claim as against the ton-hall, near Retford, Esq. delay creditors, when by the proceedings under trustee to retain the moneys-first, in repayment
Oxfordshire.-Charles Sartoris, of Wilcot-house, Esq.
Rutland.-Charles Cave John Orme, of Oakham, Esq. the composition they were to have distributed of the 2051., which they paid to Rome and Co., in
Shropshire.-John Henniker Lovett, of Fern-hill, Os. equally among them the money realised by the order to obtain possession of the policy; and westry, Esq. assignment. Upon the whole facts I am of secondly, in discharge, so far as the balance will Somersetshire.-Mordaunt Fenwick-Bisset, of Bag. opinion that this was a dealing with the property extend, of their own equitable lien. Under these borough, Taunton, Esq. of Edward Helliwell, by James Helliwell, in good circumstances, it appears to me that Stuart and
County of Southampton.-John Brown Willis Fle. faith and for valuable consideration, that it was Co. stood as respects the liquidating debtors in ming, of Chilworth-house, Southampton, Esq.
Staffordshire.-Henry Ward, of Oaklands, Esq. not done to defeat or delay creditors, and was not loco Paton, Anderson, and Co., the vendors, and
Suffolk.-Henry Alexander Starkie Bence, of Thor. an act of bankruptcy available for adjudication, that they had a derivative vendor's lien upon the ington-hall, Esq. and that the motion must be dismissed with goods, and so far as those goods had been de. Surrey.- Albert George Sandeman, of The Hollies, costs.
stroyed by fire upon the policy which represented Weybridge, Esq. Notice of appeal by the trustee in bankruptcy or covered them. Whatever was the state of
Sussex.-Sir James Duke, of Laughton-lodge, Bart. was given. things under which the debtors who had effected wick, Esq.
Warwickshire.-Thomas Lloyd, of The Priory, War. the policy in their own names for cotton of which Westmoreland.-Frank Atkinson Argles, of Eversley, LIVERPOOL COUNTY COURT.
they were the owners, indorsed it to Rome and Milnthorpe, Esq.
Wiltshire.-Sir John Neeld, of Grittleton, Chippen.
ham, Bart. (Before Serjt. WHEELER, LL.D., Judge.) and Co. gave the latter, as I think, no authority Pershore, Esq.
Worcestershire.-Henry Sales Scobell, of The Abbey, E.c parte STUART.
to transfer or re-indorse the policy to Stuart and Yorkshire.-Frederick Bacon Frank, of Campsall.
(NORTH AND SOUTH.)
Anglesey.-William Williams, of Tydlyn Mawr, Esq.
& tortious Breconshire.- John Jayne, of Pantyhailey, Esq. for the respondent.
act, and Stuart and Co. cannot acquire any Cardiganshire.-John Edwardes Rogers, of Abermei. His Honour, who had reserved judgment, now additional title thereby, their title resting exclu. rig, near Lampeter, Esq; said : This was a motion on behalf of the trustee sively on their equitable claim, which was not
Carmarthenshire.- Astley Thompson, of Giyn Abbey,
Esq. for an order upon Stuart and Co. to pay over to forfeited, nor, indeed, affected, by the indorse
Carnarvonshire-Owen Evans, of Broom-ball, Esq. him 7601., the proceeds of a policy of insurance ment in their favour of Rome and Co. Viewed
Denbighshire.-William Cornwallis West, of Ruthin upon cotton improperly received by them, and strictly as a mere legal right, Stuart and Co. are Castle, Esq. which, in fact, form part of the debtors' estate, or not, in my judgment, entitled to retain any part Flintshire.-Edwin William Philips, of Rhual, Esq. for such other order as the court, under the of the proceeds of the policy of which they thus
Glamorgansbire.-Charles Henry Williams, of Roath. circumstances, may see fit to make. The facts possessed themselves. But inasmuch as their court, near Cardiff, Esq.
Merionethshire.-Edward Foster Coulson, of Corsy. are voluminous and somewhat complicated, but equitable rights under the policy cannot be gedol, Esq. 80 far as material to the present question they affected by the irregularity of the means by which Montgomeryshire.-Henry Bertie Watkin Williams seem to be these: - The liquidating debtors, it came into their hands; and inasmuch as the Wynn, of Plas.naut-p: Meichaid, Esq. through Rome and Co., of Liverpool, their trustee under the liquidation, if he had received Pembrokeshire.-Richard Edward Arden, of Pont. brokers,
purchased four lots of cotton belong the proceeds, as in strictness he was entitled to faen, Esq. ing to Paton, Anderscn and Co., of Memphis. do, would have been bound, in my view, to satisfy
Raulnorshire. - Robert Lewis Lloyd, of Nantwilt,
Rhayader, Esq. The first purchase was on the 10th Nov. 1869; their equitable claim thereout. I shall place the last on the 30th March 1870. There is no them in the same position by my order of dispute as to the three first purchases; the dis- to-day as if that course had been taken. That In an action in Illinois for breach of promise, pute arises out of the last transaction. That position would have been that they would plaintiff's mother was asked by plaintiff's counsel purchase consisted of 100 bales. of which thirty have been entitled to receive for their own whether plaintiff from her conduct was or was not eight were
burnt in the course of transit from use so much of the 7601. as sufficed to satisfy siucerely attached to defendant, and the question Memphis, the place of shipment, to New York, their equitable claim, but nothing more. Nor was held admissible. the remaining sixty-two bales only coming to to the extent of that equitable claim do I see NEWGATE Prisox.—The following is the official hand. The course of business was for Paton, anything in the order and disposition clause of the report of the state of Her Majesty's Gaol of Anderson and Co. to forward the cotton, with Act which was referred to in the argument that Newgate on Sunday, the 4th Feb. 1872 :--bills of lading, to New York, to Stuart and Co really affects the case or their rights. My order Prisoners under sentence of penal servitude for 15 there, who accepted the vendors' bills for the therefore will be that an account shall be taken of years, male 1 ; ditto, 14 years, female 1 ; ditto, 12 amount, and then drew bills ou the debtors, which the amount due to Stuart and Co. at the date of years, male 1; ditto, 10 years, males 7; ditto 7 were forwarded to the Manchester firm of Stuart and the receipt by them of the 7601., and that to the years, males 17, females 3; ditto, 5 years, males Co., and through their Liverpool agents presented to extent of the amount then due they shall be at 5, females 3: ditto under sentence of imprison. the debtors for acceptance. The cotton wasinsured liberty to retain the moneys in their hands ; but ment in Newgate, females 2; ditto, whose judg. for the benefit of the holders of the bills of lading, that they must pay over to the trustee a part of ment is respited, males 2; ditto, committed for the first of the four lots of cotton being insured the debtor's estate, the balance remaining. I may trial, malos 4, females 2; ditto, remanded for next in America by Paton and Co., who, however, just add, with respect to the 2051. paid by Stuart session, males 4 ; ditto, 'remanded for furtner ex. charged a premium to the debtors. The other and Co. to Rome and Co., that the payment was at amination, males 12, females 3 : ditto, insane on lots were insured by the debtors in Liverpool in their own risk and in their own wrong, and the arraignment, males 2; ditto, for House of Correctheir own names. The policy of insurance for the trustee has nothing to do with it or with any tion, males 4, females 2 ; total-males 59 ; females, last 100 bales, which covered the inland transit, question or controversy arising out of it. The 16 ; 'grand total, 75. In the infirmaries, mulos 2 : was retained by the debtors; and on the 30th costs of the trustee in this motion ought, I think, patients not in the infirmaries, females 7, malos.April 1870, they received notice of the oss by to be paid by Stuart and Co., and I shall so order. ' Gaol of Newgate, Feb 5.
*' is re
THE NEW SILKS.-Crown Office, Feb. 5.— The am sure he will obtain the thanks of a numerous
NOTES AND QUERIES ON Queen has been pleased by Letters Patent under family of worthy recipients. When so many things the Great Seal to grant precedence within the Bar then are threatening to overwhelm us, it behores
POINTS OF PRACTICE. · to Augustine Sargood, Serjeant-at-Law, next after us to be up and doing, for whilst every other Samuel Pope, Esq., one of Her Majesty's counsel branch of trade and profession has its association NOTICE.-- We must remind our correspondents that this learned in the law now being. The Queen has or union, we have no kind of ainalgamation column is not open to 1111stions into2 points of a
uchas a sucitor should be counted upwa. Queries will also been pleased by Letters Patent under the wherewith to protect ourselves or support our be exclures which so beyond our limits. Great Seal to constitute and appoint Thomas interests, and I would ask, cannot something be X.B. --Xobc are inserted tules the marae and address of the Charles Renshaw, Esq., of Lincoln's-inn; Leofric done by us to form a "National Society of Law writers are sent, not necessarily for publication, but as a
guarantee for buia fides.
91. SCOTCH PROCEDURE.-- Where, on a trial of murder, Boteler Bristowe, Esq., the Inner Temple; John
FIDELIS. in a Scotch court, a verdict of " not proven' Charles Day, Esq., of the Middle Temple : Jo!ın
turned, can the prisoner be again tries on the saiue
cbarge, if additionul evidence be forthcoming? Berry Torr. Erq., of the Middle Temple ; Nathaniel LIABILITY OF BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEES FOR:
F. W. S. Lindley, Esq., of the Middle Temple; Joseph Costs.-RE HAMMOND ParkER.-I fully concur Napier 'Higgiós, Esq., of Lincoln's-inn; Thomas with the views set forth in your ably written
92. ARTICLED CLERKS. --Could yon or any of your Halhed Fischer, Esq., of Lincoln's-inn; James article under date 13th Jan., in reference to the
readers kindly me if there are any monthly mari. Kemplay, Esq., of the Middle Temple; Theodore judgment of Mr. Serjeant Atkinson against me.
zines published for the assistance of articleul clerts?
W. S.C. Aston, Esq., of Lincoln's-inn; Alexander Edward The fact of my acting under an order of the court, Miller, Esq., of Lincoln's-inn ; Charles Russell, dated 17th March last, which is in the file of the 93 BEQUEST -- Parper LUNATIC. Would any of your Esq., of Lincoln's-inn; and rer Herschell, Esq., | proceedings, and worded thus-" It is further realers inform me if any form of bequest of a sum of of Lincoln's-inn, of Her Majesty's counsel learned Orderod that these inquiries (referring to Wilde's money to a proper luvatie could be suczested so that in the law. and Drake's securities) shall be prosecuted without
the authorities of the parislı or the asylumn can ku se 10 claim thereon ?
z. delay," has been unrecognised by the learned
judge, and which, in my judgment, ought, if 91 BANKRUPTCY-MOTION - PRACTICE.--I am coCORRESPONDENCE OF THE known, to make my caso the stronger. Had I not cerned for a trustee, and notice has been given me by a PROFESSION. obeyed this order, I would have been chargeable creditor whose proof the trustee has rejectedl, of the
creditor's intention to move the Court for leare to with neglect of duty, and conld have been com.
prove, and affidavits have been filed in snpport thereof. initted for contempt of court; and because I
On my taking atidavits in oppositioa to be filed by the Note.-- This department of the Law Tues being open to simply do my duty as trusteo, I am persecuted registrar, lie de lined to file them uutil I made an appli
free discussion on all professional topics, the Elity is not for resisting what I regarded as a most unjust cation to the Court for leave to do so, aud paid the fee, responsible for any opinious or statements contained in it. demand; two executions were issued against my 5s, and referred me to rule 54 as the authority. Will
property, and I was brought up before the late some of your readers wbo are registrars of County LAW CLEEKS.—I have read with interest your Besides the loss of my remuneration, I have been Judge Stansfeld to be committed to prison. Official or practitiover with a large practice in the
Courts, with lankruptcy business attached, or some notice relative to the proposed establishment of a unjustly compelled to pay £15 out of my own
London Bankruptcy Court, state the practice in their - National Society of Public Accountants,” and pocket in this matter.
E. also a letter from Mr. Charley on the subject of
GEORGE P. COTTON.
95. ARTICLED CLERK. "The Legal Profession," both of which appear in
A gentleman named Walter
Smith Wits articled under tbat name. He has, for your issue of the 20th ult.; and whilst it seeing
various reasons, adopted the name of Brooksbank, and probable, from the notices given by Mr. Charley,
is now known as Walter Brooksbank Smith. He is and the motion by Sir Roundell Palmer, as to the
INVADERS. —I send you a copy of an advertise- about to go in for his Internediate Examination. What foundation of a law school, that everything that ment appearing in the Telegraph of this day formalities (if any) are necessary to prove that he is
tbe same person as the Walter Smith named in bis can possibly be done for the advantage of the legal (Jan. 25, 1872) :
articles of clerkship? Is an affidavit to that effect reprofession is about to be done ; may. I trespass LA AW BUSINESS, debts, contracts, and every de. quired ?
Z. upon your space a little to draw the attention of scription of claim collected and enforced by legal the profession generally, and that of the clerks in process. Small commission on actual receipts. No 96. LANDLORD AND TENANT.-Lodging house keepers particular, to the position in which the latter are
charge whatever unless successful. Consultation free. at the sea-side are very sharp), and in the event of a
Mr. Robinson, 3, Germain-villas, Brockley-road, now placed. Some time since a letter appeared in
dispute, and the unfortunate lodger should quit the Forest-hill.
apartment a few minutes after tweise at 10011, will le your valuable paper, signed “Spec,” on the same
If the advertiser is not a duly qualified solicitor down upon bim for anotber week's pay. I should be cordially agree, and it is with the view of eliciting impudenco is little short of sublime, and the subiect, and with the sentiments of which I most (a fact not dificult to ascertain), I must say his with if none of your compudents would interne
if is , and whether (if it be so) law is, froin others of the “unadmitted” an arowal of solicitors will have shown an extraordinary annount quarterly, and monthly tenancy:
strictly. Freaking, the same in the case of a yearls,
I feel doubtful atout opinion on a subject so closely concerning their of apathy if they take no action in the matter. welfare that I now trouble you. It must be patent
it, because in Stephen's Commentaries it is stated that it to all that the province of the unadmitted clerk
I am bound to ply money on any certain dar, I dis.
chary: the obligation if i pay it before twelve o'chek (which has been, and now is anything but an en
at night, and rent does not become nue till the last viable one) is suffering from a rapidly increasing
ATTORNEY's Cost OF DUTY.-In answer to minute of the day on which it is payable.-P. W.F. invasion ; so great, in fact, are the inroads now
your correspondent "A. B.” in the Law Times of being made that I venture to think it must ulti. the 3rd instant, I think he will be clearly liable to mately result in persons of any respectability pay the certificate duty of LV, he having been
Answers. being absolutely driven from tho field. Various admitted an attorney more than threo y:ars.
(Q. 74.) INTERMEDIATE EXAxIXATIONS. --The “ Arti. are the means by which this will be bronght about;
cled Clerk" had better get, troru the Law Society's the principal, however, is undoubtedly the over
Hall, Chaucery-lane, Lond n, a list of the subjects for crowding of the profession, of which anyone who SHERIFFS' FEES.—The liability of attorneys for
the interme iite txaniinations of the year in which le read, your journal can have no doubt. In the fees of sheriffs' officers has lately been much dis.
intends to yop for it. And for further iuformatin he issue I have inentioned is to be found no less than cussed. There is a special cause to be argued very
may require, I would advise him to get the invok callel.
** Oriler for conducting the Preliminary and Iutersoventeen applications from otmilted gentlemen soon arising out of an action for sheriffs' fees, com. medite Examinations under the act & ** Vict. for clerkships, and in most of the cases they are menced in the City of London Conrt, in which r. 127, ss. 5. 6, and 9," fron the same place. We will for situations which could be occupied by men some of the main points in dispute may be decided, find himself better informed on this subject by getting without the pale of the profession. One of these but we understand that the caso referred to is
whut I have mentioned, then be would lis skire ques gentlemen seeks to become a " resident assistant” likely to go off on other points, and even if it does
tions in the Law Times. And he will also iing he will
both save his own time aud the time of those who uuder. on the “board), lodying,'' and he should have said not a special case cannot, it seems, be appealed. take to auswer his queries. " washing system, with a stipend of 251. a year, The chief points in dispute we take to be, first, can
ANOTHER ARTICLES CICEX. which reminds one very much of an engagement a sheriff or an officer, or a bailiif iegally sue for any with a flunkey or a duirymaid. His case too is fees whatever secondly, if so, cau be sue the at. not an isolated one, for of late there have been torney who issues the writ of execution. We as.
(2.77.) LANDLORD AND TENANT.--The Court of Cn. numbers of the same class and kind. Clerks, how.
mou Pleas have beld that a tenancy !r week tweet sume there is no express promise or special employ. does not determine without reasonable notice: Juin8 ever, have little to fear from men of his stamp ment by the attorney. The contention is that he V. Milx, ') C. B N. S. 776.) It would Iut be cafe to (and I for one sincerely wish that he may find i cannot recover or take any fee legally except cus der less than it week's potice expiring at tbe eta “ comfortable home'') ; but it is from men who, where the debt has been levied by seizure and
of some com lese veel as a res nable nurice. Srube having been uimitted, i re intended for, and o:ght Sulo. We contend also that a writ is not executed rewarks of Mr. Justice Williams in the afore çare.
2. to be working in another sphero, that we have until a levy has been made, and that there can. most to complain. I would also call attention to not be a levy without both seizure and sale. 12.78.; DEEDS – Durr. I intended to hare replied to the fact that we are suffering encroachment not These questions are often recurring to us, and this query last week, but as there appears no ausner to only at the hands of the strictly legal profession, no doubt to many other firins who, like our-elves. it in your last issue, this may still be of service tv puur but also from a numerous class of individuals have had a disinclination to contest the points at
correšnoudent, “Clerk." Assuming there buteen 110 calling themselves accountants. The numerous the expense of the client. It has, however, boen
secretia of fresh property to the tri sts sime the duties which formerly devolved upon the account. suggested that very probably many firmy will
original deed, or will, we leade, there wouid toen het
Separateluty for the declara:iun first.vnd beauties ant clerk of the office, and for which he sometimes I be ylail to subscribe a guinea or two to a fund to would otherwise be as follows: (1) Fr the instrumert received a higher rate of remuneration, are now, in meet the expenses of getting the matter decided of appointment, containing a trauster of property as most instances, handed over to and undertaken bv by a sufficient euthority. This would be some vame, stamps 10x and lus; (2) for tbe trusler of the these men, who, hot content with this, seek still what expensive, but, on the other hand, it woulu
three Debeuture Bouls of £500 each, it by the in-trizgreater advantages by advertising themselves as be is great thing to be relieved for the future
ment, stamp 103., ir by three instruments, stimp li's.
on each of the three; (3) on the three Morate Transtrustees in bankruptcy, and this I fearlessly assert from the annoyance, tronble, and sometimes loss, fer3. for £169), +13:), un M. Stemps respectively of should jnstly have fallen to the office of the ac- arising out of their claims. We should be glad t) Ss., 7s, 60., anii 1s. I muy add that while, on ili tirit countant clerk. With the formation of a law school take the iuitiative in the matter on the firse ciumg into operation of the consolidation Act (St.np must be considered the fact that by impozing the opportunity, if the movement is sutlicientiy sup
Act 1571, 33 34 Vict. c, 971, there was, I have reason termsat present proposed, the hopes of many indus. ported. We shoull have no difficulty in starting your correspondent mor rest satisfied that the Inland
t believe, some difierence of opiuion in official quarters. trious clerks, who have laboured their wholelife with the fund, and woull gladly take some trouble in the view of being ultimately almitted into the
Rerenne anthorities will rule in accordance with the the matter. If you, Sir, insert this letter we vews above expresse 1. The following practical diihen ty profession, will be for ever cut off, unless we find sholl hope for success, ils se shall feel you con. may, however, arise. Companies do not acknowledge some worthy champion who will undertake our sider the proposal a legitimate one. Wo ask
trusts, only absolute « wuership, and the company to defence and promote our interests in the Honse such of yonr rulers na sre interested in this whom the transfer of the deskeutures bare to be recisof Commons; and if Mr. Charley at the same time i subject to communicate with us,
terrel mar object to the sin Icy of the Is, lut),
which use thy should be shown eet 75 of the Stamp that he is looking so keenly after the informats of
BARVARD ASD Co. for, it required t accept the transfere 1pon the fold the profession, wiil but remember us likewise, I 8, Lancaster-place, Strand, W.C.
lo ing certitate being writieu, as I would sugsest, in