Page images
PDF
EPUB

it was

of Suffolk and Antrim, to Lady Strachan for life, manager, or other officer of the company wilfully testator intended to devise under the description and after her death he directed it to be equally omitting to enter any charge on this register. of Edge Farm the other lands in his occupation in divided between her three daughters, Matilda, Messrs. Valpy and Chaplin appealed from this the parish of Crich, as well as the farm purchased Charlotte, and Louisa Strachan, during their decision.

by him in 1813. The main difficulty in the way lives and the life of the longest liver of Wintle for the appellants.

of holding that was that he was only tenant them. Lady Strachan died in 1857. Miss F. J. Wood for the respondents.

in common of a portion of theso lands, and tenant Charlotte Strachan, then the Countess de Zichy Lord Justice JAMES thought that the order of at will of another portion, but those portions Ferraris, died on the 10th Nov. 1851, domi. the Master of the Rolls must be confirmed. Sect. were so small that it had probably escaped the ciled in Hungary, having by her will bequeathed 43 of the Act did not make void a mortgage not testator's memory that he was not owner of all her interest in the anngity to her executors on entered on the register, but his Lordship was of the land in his occupation. The Vice-Chancellor's certain trusts. It was decided by Lord Justice opinion that it was not competent for the solicitor decision must be affirmed. Costs of all parties James,, then Vice-Chancellor, that on their or any officer of a company to enforce a charge out of the estate. mother's death the three daughters became enti. which they had neglected to get registered. It Lord Justice JAMES was of the same opiuion. tled to the annuity in equal shares as tenants in made no difference that the appellants were not Solicitors for the appellant, Satchell and common. The question in the present case was the habitual solicitors of the company. His Lord. Chapple, for Jessop and Harris, Crich. whether legacy duty was payable in respect of the ship thought it was their plain duty to see that Solicitors for the respondents, Dobinson and interest in the annuity given by the will of the the charge was registered, and it would be most Geare. Countess. The Vice-Chancellor (see 25 L. T. Rep. dangerous to allow any one whose duty it was to N. S. 171) held that no legacy duty was payable, see charges registered to take advantage of a

ROLLS COURT.
and the Crown appealed.
charge which had not been registered. The deci.

Jan. 31 and Feb. 9.
The Solicitor-General (Jessel, Q.C.) and W. w. sion of the Master of the Rolls was a wholesome
Karslake, for the Crown.
one, and must be affirmed.

BUSBY V. THE CORPORATION OF LEEDS. Schomberg, Q.C., Fry, Q.C., Macnaghten, and J. Appeal accordingly dismissed with costs.

Tramways Act 1870—Repair of road by road 7. Anderson, for the persons interested under the will of the Countess.

Solicitors for the appellants, Valpy and Chaplin. authority-Right to stop traffic on tramway.

Solicitors for the respondents, Poole and Hughes. A motion was made in this suit raising a question Vaughan Hawkins, for the executors of Lady

under the Tramways Act 1870, as to the right of Strachan.

the “road authority" to stop the traffic on a tramAmphlett, Q.C. and Owen, for the executors of CITY OF Moscow GAS COMPANY 1. INTERNA

way during the repair of the road. The plaintiffs the Countess.

TIONAL FINANCIAL ASSOCIATION. Lord Justice JAMES, in delivering the judgment

are the owners of a tramway from Leeds to of the court, said that they were of opinion that

Practice-Security for costs-Cross suit-Com. Headingsley, which, for the greater part of the panies Act 1862, s. 69.

distance, was laid in macadam, with the approval the estate of the Countess was an estate pur This was an appeal from an order of the Master of the Corporation, who are the “ road authority, autre vie, that by the 6th section of the Wills Act of the Rolls directing the plaintiff company to under the Act, and which was opened for public

an estate pur autre vie, applicable by law give security for the costs of the suit. The defen. traffic last July. The macadam having worn away in the same manner as personal estate,” and was therefore within the words of the 20th section of tiff company had filed a bill for foreclosure, and road, the corporation, in Dec. last, gave the plain.

dant company who were mortgagees of the plain. leaving the rails projecting above the level of the the Legacy Duty Act of George III. Legacy duty the City of Moscow Gas Company then filed the tiffs notice to pave the portion of the road between was, therefore, payable. No costs.

present bill seeking to cut down the amount of the the rails, and a space of 18 inches on each side Solicitors for the Crown, The Solicitors to the security and to redeem at a smaller amount. Their of the rails, with granite setts, as provided by the Laland Revenue.

property was situated at Moscow and they had no 28th section of the Act. The plaintiffs did not Solicitors for the respondents, Davies and property in this country, and therefore the defen. comply with this notice, and after considerable Williams ; Capron, Dalton and Hutchins; Forrer, dant company took out a summons requiring them negotiation the corporation, on the 3rd Jan., re, Ouvry and Co.

to give security for the costs of this suit, under peated it, with an intimation that if not complied

the 69th section of the Companies Act, which pro with the corporation would themselves execute Tuesday, Feb. 13.

vides that where a limited company is plaintiff in the work and recover the expenses from the

any suit, &c., any judge having jurisdiction in the plaintiffs. On the 18th Jan. the corporation gave (Before Lord Justice JAMES.)

matter may, if it appears by any credible testi- notice that they should commence the work on Re THE LONDON GAS LIGHT COMPANY mony that there is reason to believe that if the the 25th Jan., and during its progress should stop (LIMITED); Ex parte WEBBER.

defendant is successful in his defence the assets the traffic upon such portion of the tramway as Practice-Eraminer-Witness-Jurisdiction of the company will be insufficient to pay his might be necessary, but with as little inconve. Companies Act 1862, s. 115.

costs, require sufficient security to be given for nience to the plaintiffs as possible. The plaintiffs This was an appeal motion from an order of the such costs. The City of Moscow Gas Company then filed their bill, and obtained on an ex parte Master of the Rolls. The company was ordered appealed from the order of the Master of the Rolls. application, an interim order, restraining the to be wound-up in June 1866, and Webber was

Fry, Q.C. and Cookson, for the appellants, con corporation from interfering with the tramway so settled on the list of contributories. In May 1868 tended that this was a cross bill, and merely a as to stop or materially interfere with the traffic. Webber executed a deed of composition which was defence to the original suit, and that the appel. Southgate, Q. C. and C. Hall for the plaintiffs. assented to by the requisite number of creditors lants ought therefore not to be required to give Fry, Q.C. and Graham Hastings for the corpo.

ration. and duly registered under the provisions of the security for costs. Bankruptcy Act 1861. In July 1871 the official

Charles Hall and Davey, for the respondents. Lord ROMILLY said it was clear that the road liquidator, who did not execute the deed, served a

Lord Justice JAMES was of opinion that this case was in a highly dangerous state, and that being summons on Webber under the 115th section

was governed by Washoe Mining Co. v. Ferguson so, the defendants, as the road authority, were of the Companies Act 1862, to attend before the (L. Rep. 2 Eq. 371), and that the second suit was

entitled to repair it and charge the expenses to examiner and be examined. Webber having re

not so strictly in the nature of a cross suit to the the plaintiffs, and the question was whether the fased to answer the question put by the examiner :

first as to make the rule applicable which exempts defendants had a right to stop the traffic during the “ Did you not promise some of your creditors to the plaintiff company in a cross suit from giving repairs. It had been admitted that it would be pay them something more than the composition security for costs. The order of the Master of possible to do the repairs without stopping the as an inducement to them to execute the deed P” tho Rolls was perfectly right and must be traffic, though the expense would be greater, but the matter came before the Master of the Rolls, affirmed.

as this would fall on the plaintiffs, and to stop the who held that the witness must answer the ques.

Appeal accordingly dismissed with costs.

traffic would be to impose a vast amount of incon. tion, although the Court of Bankruptcy had sole Solicitors for the appellants, Harrison, Eeal, and venience on the tramway passengers, he should jurisdiction as to the composition deed. From Harrison.

continue the interim order until the hearing on this order Webber appealed.

Solicitor for the respondents, Clements.

the usual undertaking. Locock Webb for the appellant.

Solicitors : Emmets, Watson, and Emmet; Higgins, Q.C. for the liquidator.

Norris, Allens, and Carter. Lord Justice JAMES said that the witness had

Jan. 31 and Feb. 13 and 14. no right to refuse to answer the question, on the

(Before the LORDS JUSTICES.) ground that the court had no jurisdiction in the

BURLEY V. SAINT.

Jan. 30 and Feb. 10. matter. It was only on the ground that to answer Will-Construction - Falsa demonstratio-Parcel

PHILLIPS v. SILVESTER. & question would incriminate him or be a breach

or no parcel.

Vendor and purchaser-Specific performanceof professional confidence, that a witness giving This was an appeal from a decision of Wickens,

Deterioration of property sold-Delay. evidence before an examiner could refuse to | V.C. By his will dated the

18th Jan. 1840, one In August 1865, the Rev. Mr. Nanney, the owner answer. It was questionable whether an appeal Beardsley, devised all that his messuage, farm, of certain premises in the county of Merioneth, ought ever to be allowed in a case of this kind.

lands, and premises, called or known by the name agreed to sell the same to the defendant for £8500. Appeal accordingly dismissed with costs. Solicitors for the appellant, J. W. Snell.

of Edge Farm, in the parish of Crich, then in his The agreement provided that the purchase should

own occupation, to his widow for life, with re. be completed on the 25th March 1866, or, if not Solicitors for the liquidator, Crossley and Burn. mainder to his daughter for life, with remainder then completed, that the purchaser should pay

to her children, and he died in the following year. interest at £5 per cent per annum until comple

Edge Farm consisted of a messuage and over tion. The title was accepted, and a draft con. Re PATENT BREAD MACHINERY COMPANY ;

seventy-eight acres of land, when purchased by veyance was prepared, and sent to the defendant's Er parte VALPY AND CHAPLIN.

the testator in 1813. At the time of his death he solicitor, but in November 1865 the vendor died, Company-Winding-up-Charge - Registration, occupied the whole of it except a two acre having devised the property agreed to be sold to Companies Act 1862, s. 43.

field, and he also had in his occupation other the plaintiff, a solicitor, who altered the draft con. This was an appeal from a decision of the Master land contiguous to Edge Farm, in the parish of veyance, excepting certain parcels of land, which of the Rolls refusing an application on the part of Crich. Of a small portion of this land he was were then in the occupation of a tramway com. Messrs. Valpy and Chaplin, solicitors, seeking to only tenant in common, and of another small por. pany, under a yearly way leave, but the defendant enforce a charge for costs against certain property tion tenant at will. The above suit was one for refused to accept this alteration. Subsequently Valpy and Chaplin were not administration of the trusts of the will,

and under these parcels of land were taken by the Talyllyn the regular solicitors of the company, but were

the decree the chief clerk found that Edge Farm Railway Company under their statutory powers, employed in a certain matter, and the directors gave mentioned in the will consisted of the farm pur- and the question as to the exception of these them

a letter charging the costs on certain moneys chased by the testator in 1813, and of the other parcels of land not being settled, after a conpayable to the company. The Master of the lands in the parish of Crich in the testator's occu- siderable amount o: correspondence between the Rolls refused the application on the ground that nation at his

death. The Vice-Chancellor having parties, the plaintiff filed his bill for a speci. the letter giving the charge had not been registered affirmed this finding, the plaintiff appealed

from fic performance of the contract of August in accordance with sect. 43 of the Companies Act his order.

1865. The defendant, by his answer claimed 1862, which requires every limited company under Hardy, Q. C. and Renshaw, Q. C. for the appel. to be entitled to a conveyance of the whole the Act to keep a register of all mortgages and lant.

estate, including the parcels of land occupied charges specifically affecting property of the

Greene, Q.C. and Caldecott, for the respondents. by the Tramway Company at the date of the company, and imposes a penalty on every director, Lord Justice MEGLISH was of opinion that the agreement, and also to compensation for the de.

:

of the company.

&

terioration of the property since the 25th March J. M. Howard, Hon.W.T. Massey, for the plaintiffs. alleged had been lost in consequence of the 1866, which he alleged was considerable.

Sir R. Palmer, Sir R. Baggallay, and Mr. Ince, auctioneer who they had employed having become Sir R. Baggallay, Q.C. and Rowcliffe for the for the defendants.

bankrupt. This surcharge was disallowed by the plaintiff.

Lord ROMILLY, in an elaborate judgment, chief clerk who stated that he would submit the Roxburgh, Q. C. and Fawcett, for the defendant. reviewed the facts, and decided that there was facts for the consideration of the court. Edward

Lord Romilly said that in his opinion it was sufficient evidence to establish the plaintiff's claim. Ellison then served a notice upon John Ellison, a principle of equity that a vendor was bound to

Decree accorlingly. one of the executors, to attend before the ex: deliver the thing sold in the same or as good con.

aminer, to be cross-examined upon six affidarits dition as it was at the date of the contract for

filed in the cause. John Ellison attended before

V. C. MALINS' COURT. sale, when the delay in completion was not occa

the examiner, but refused to be sworn and ex. sioned by the purchaser. The plaintiff was en.

Friday, Feb. 9.

amined, on the grounds that the examination, if titled to a decree for specific performance of the LETHBRIDGE v. ADAMS ; ex parte TIE LIQUI. any was required, should have taken place in contract, and for payment of interest on the pur- DATOR OF THE INTERNATIONAL LIFE ASSUR. chambers, and before the chief clerk had given chase money remaining due, from the 25th March ANCE SOCIETY.

his decision on the surcharge. The accounts 1866, but there must be an inquiry that rents | Assurance company Winding-up - Claim by had been completed and the draft certificate and profits had been received by the plaintiff since

holders of subsisting policies against share made out but not settled. Edward Ellison now the 25th March 1866, or what, but for his wilful holders for breach of contract-Unlimited lia. moved that John Ellison might be ordered to default, might have been received, and an inquiry bility.

attend at his own expense and be examined before what sum would be required to restore the pro. This was a claim by the official liquidator of the

one of the examiners of the court, and prodnce the perty to the same state in which it then was, and above society against the estate of Mary Adams, books and doccuments mentioned in the subpæna the amount so found due would be set-off against which was being administered in the suit. She and pay the costs of the application. the interest.

was the holder of 200 shares of £20 each in the Ainphlett, Q.C. and Ingle Joyce were in support Solicitors, Gregory and Co., Tooke, and Holland, society, which was not registered under the of the motion. Limited Liability Acts, but was constituted by a

Kay, Q.C. and Finch were for John Ellison. Feb. 10 and 12. deed of settlement dated in 1833, which provided

The VICE-CHANCELLOR said that the applicant that in every po icy there should be express words should have expressed his desire to have crossBiggs v. FOSTER.

for making all sums of money payable by virtue examined the executor before the Chief Clerk Will-- Misdescription of lejatee.

thereof, payable out of the funds and assets of the came to a decision; but as he was unwilling to Petition and further consideration. A testator society only. The policies issued by the society exclude any evidence, he would give him leave to hal by his will (inter alia) bequeathed a sum of accordingly contained a proviso that the funds cross-examine Mr. John Ellison relative to the money " to the children of my sister Elizabeth and property of the society should alone be surcharge of £350. Costs of this application and Colpman, deceased.” He had had a sister named answerable for the payment of the moneys assured, of the examination reserved. Catherine Colpman, and another sister named and that no shareholder should be responsiblo Solicitors for the applicant, Ingle, Cooper, and Elizabeth Catlin. The question now arose, what for the payment of the moneys assured beyond Holmes: persons wero entitled. There was evidence that the amount of the unpaid part for the time being

Solicitors for the respondent, Norris, Allen, and the testator was on intimate terms with the chil- of his or her shares in the subscribed capital. Carter. dren of his sister Catherine Colpman, and that he On the 19th Feb. 1869 the society was ordered to hul frequently declared his intention of benefiting be wound-up, and calls had been made to the

Jan. 9, 10, and 13. them.

extent of the unpaid capital. The full amount of PRESTON v. THE CORPORATION OF GREAT A. E. Miller Q. C., and T. Brett for the children £20 per share had been paid on the 200 shares held

YARMOUTH. of Catherine Colpman.

by Mary Adams. The official liquidator now made Corporation Special Act-Mortgage of ratesSouthgate, Q. C., and Methold (representing the a further claim against her estate on behalf of the Suitor's Fee Fund) for the children of Elizabeth holders of those policies which had not matured This suit was instituted by Isaac Preston, a mort

Right to repayment of principal-Receirer. Catlin.

into claims at the date of the winding-up. He Stallard and Lee for other parties.

insit.d that in these cases the society had broken gagee of the general district rates of Great YarLord Romilly held that the circumstances of the contract: the clairn, therefore, was not under enforce payment of the principal and interest due

inouth, against the corporation of that town to the case were sufficient to justify him in arriving the contract (in which case the above proviso to him, and for a receiver. The corporation wers, at the conclusion that the testator had intended would have applied), but was for damages, for by their local Act, empowered to raise inoney for to benefit the children of Mrs. Catherine Colpman, breach of contract. Toe holders of these policies the improvement of the town, and for this purand made an order accordingly.

were, therefore, entitled to recover against the Solicitors: Duncan and Murton; Freshficius. shareholders personally, and to an unlimited

pose to mortgage the general district rates.

In the form of mortgage prescribed by the extent. Glasse, Q.C. and Higgins for the official liqui. of the money, and the only mode of repay.

Act, no time was specified for the repayment Monday, Feb. 12. dator.

ment mentioned in the Act was that the corpo. GILCHRIST v. HERBERT.

Cotton, Q. C. and Ince for the executors of ration should yearly and every year pay off and Parol evidence of lost letters containing proniise, on Mary Adams, were not called on.

discharge the sum of £100 at the least, of the faith of w’ich marriage was alleged to have to the provisions of the deed of settlement and particular mortgage to be paid off was to be

Tho VICE-CHANCELLOR said that having regard moners borrowed on the credit of that Act; and the tulen place-Specific performance. The facts in this case were characterised by the the policies, he was of opinion that the liability of ascertained by ballot. On the 9th Angust 1869, Master of the Rolls in his judgment as being very the official liquidator must therefore be disallowed. required them at the expiration of six months to

the shareholders was not unlimited. The claim of the plaintiff gave the defendants notice that he simple in their outline, but assuming in their details the aspect of a tale of romance.” The

Solicitors : Jolin Tucker; Bird and Son,

pay him the principal and interest due to him on outline is, however, all we can attempt to give

lis mortgage. This the defendants refused to do on the present occasion. This was a bill filed by

lay, Feb. 10.

on the grounds that, according to the prorisions a Mrs. Gilchrist against the trustee of her late

DEANES V. KITCHIN.

of their local Act, they were not bound to pay husband's will, to have it declared that she was Practice-Substituted service of notice of motion off more than £100 yearly of the principal moneys entitled to ono half of her late husband's pro

for decree.

borrowed on the credit of that Act. The interest perty, all of which he had by his will bequeathed This was a suit instituted to administer the on the money borrowed had always been regularly to his daughter by a former marriage. * In 1961 estate of an intestate, the defendants being the paid, Mrs. Gilchrist, a widow with five children, had administratrix and the heir-at-law. The estate Eldia, Q.C. and Wm. Pearson were for the heen engaged to bo married to a Dr. Evans. consisted chiefly of realty, all of which had been plaintiff. Subsequently to this engagement she became sold by a mortgagee, in whose hands the surplus Kay, Q.C., Lindley, Q.C., and Rodwell were for acqnainted with her lato husband, who wrote her purchase.money remained. The heir-at-law, on

the defendants. 1 number of letters, one of which, it was alleged, hearing of the death, ceme to England from The VICE-CHANCELLOR was of opinion that contained a promise that if she would throw America. Ho was served with a copy of the bill. this was not a case in which he could appoint : over the doctor and marry him he would settle and an appourance was entered by the plaintiff receiver. If the plaintiff was not satisfied to wait £10,000 pin money upon her, and leave her, by for him. Haring discovered, however, that he until he was paid off in the manner prescribed by his will, which wos never to be revoked, one half of would get nothing out of the estate, he returned to the local Act he should have tran-ferred his his property. On the faith of this promise (the bill America, and conld not be found.

mortgage. The proceedings were whily miscon. stated) the engagement with Dr. Evans ras broken P. B. Abraham now applied for an order disceived, and the bill must be dismissed with costs. off, and the marriage took place in Calcutta in 1862. pensing with service of notice of motion Solicitors for the plaintiff, Sharpe, Parker, Soon after, the parties returned to this country, decree on the heir-at-law, on the ground that by Pritchard, and Sharpe. but the marriage did not turn out happily, and in his conduct he had practically disclaimed all in. Solicitors for the defendants, Andrew Storen, about five or six weeks Mr. Gilchrist left his wife. terest in the estate. In the alternative. he asked agent for Charles Diver, Great Yarmouth; F.T. A suit was then instituted for restitution of con- that service on the administratrix might be deemed Dubois, jugal rights and alimony, wliich was compromised good service on the heir-at-law. by a settlement, whereby Mrs. Gilchrist was to The VICE CHANCELLOR made an order that have £100 a year during the joint life of her hus- servico of notice of inotion for decree upon the

V. C. WICKENS' COURT. band and herself, and £200 a year after his decease adıninistratrix should be deemed good service

Thursday, Feb. 8. for her own life. A number of letters were put in upon the heir at-law.

PHILLIPS v. THE GREAT WESTERN RAILITAT evidence written about this time from Mrs. Gil. Solicitor : C. J. Gratton.

COMPANY. christ to her husband, asking him to provide for her and her children mere liberally, and it was

Railu ay Compony-Contract to stop trains at V. C. BACON'S COURT.

refreshment station contended that such letters were inconsistent with

Postmaster. General

Breach of contract—" Public policy" In juncthe idea of her considering that he was under a

Thursilay Feb. 8.

tion. binding engagement to leave her half his property

GLOVER 4. ELLISON. by will. Mrs. Gilchrist afterwards returned to Practice- Administration suit- Proceedings in restrain the defendants from permitting certain

This was a motion for an interim injunction to India in the ship Candia. The ship met with a chambers-Decision by chief clerk-Subsequent trains from passing the Swindon station without terrific cyclone (this was proved by the vessel's cross-examination. log: book), and Mrs. Gilchrist's luggage, with the i This was al suit for the administration of the sengers to procure refreshments.

stopping a sufficient time to enable the pas.

The facts letters which contained the alleged promise, was estate of a Mr. Ellison, in which the usual decree were these : the plaintiff was the proprietor lost. A number of witnesses were prociuced had been made. Edward Elison, one of the resi. of the refreshment rooms at Swindon. By (among them the lady's former suitor, Dr. Evans) duary legatees, who had liberty to attend the the terms of his lease from the Great Western to depose from their recollection as to the con proceedings in the cause, brought into chambers Railway Company, it was covenanted on the part tents of the letters, and were cross-examined in a surcharge against the executors' ace nt, of the company "that all trains carrying passencourt. The objection was taken that the letters whereby he sought to charge them with a sum had never been stamped.

gers, not being goods trains, or trains to be sent of £350, being the proceeds of the sale of the express, or for special purposes, or trains not The Solicitor General, Serjt. Parry, A. Bathurst, testator's farming stock, which the executors under the control of the company,” which should

[ocr errors]

or

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

pass the Swindon Station either up or down, anum, and that he had been duly rated to, and lighted candle; and also that the defendants

:) should, save in cases of emergency or unusual had paid all poor rates. In Feb. 1871 he moved were negligent

in not having tested the service pipe. delay arising from accidents, stop there for a into, and occupied, 7, Taylor's-court, for which he A verdict

was therea, pon entered for the plaintiff reasonable period of about ten minutes for re- agreed to pay an annual rent of 81., his landlord for 4041. damages, and, on a rule being subse, freshments

. In Nov. last the Postmaster-General, agreeing to pay the rates. A poor rate was made quently obtained to set that verdict aside and in pursuance of the powers vested in him, in April 1871 in which the claimant's name did enter it for the defendants, on the evidence, or to by the “Act to provide for the conveyance of the not appear; he did not claim to be rated; he was mails by railways," served a notice upon the com- not entitled to the benefit of the Poor Rate resulted from the workman's negligence, and not

reduce the damages on the ground that the injury pany requiring them

to carry the mails by trains Assessment and Collection Act 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. from the defendants' breach of contract, it was leaving Paddington at 9.15 a.m. and Exeter at c. 41); but all rates in respect of 7, Taylor's- held by the Court of Exchequer (Kelly, C.B., and 2.45 p. m., and prohibiting these trains from stop court up to July 1871, were paid by the landlord. Martin, Channell

, and Pigott, BB.) disc, arging

that ping at Swindon for more than five minutes. Up The reviging barrister disallowed the claim. rule, that the defendants were liable in su to this time these trains had been used for the Saunders for the claimant.

damages for a negligent breach of cont, "act in conveyance of passengers, and had always stopped Gorst for the respondent.

supplying a defective pipe, and were not exone.

rated ten minutes at Swindon. The company acquiesced The judgment of the Court was delivered by from their liability by the negligence of the go in the requirements of the post-office, but still Brett, J. It was held (1) that in a case of fitter's workmen : (see report 22 L. T. Rep. N. S.: continued to carry passengers by the same two successive occupations the occupier may 24; L. Rep. 5 Ex. 67; 39 L. J. 33, Ex.) The defentrains. The plaintiff considering this a violation be registered, if he has been rated and has dants appealed from this decision. by the company of their covenant with him, in. paid all rates in respect of the first house, and O'Malley, Q.C. (with him W. Graham) argued stituted this suit. He now moved as above. has paid all rates payable in respect of the second for the defendants.

Sir Roundell Palmer, Q.C., Osborne Morgan, house, though he has not been rated in respect Holker, Q.C. (C. G. Merewether with him) for Q.C., and Montague Cookson, for the plaintiff. of it; and (2) that it would properly be said that the plaintiffs, was not called on, and

The Solicitor-General, Mackeson, Q.C., and H. the claimant had paid the rates : (Cook v. Tucket, The COURT (Cockburn, C.J., and Willes, BlackA. Giffard, for the defendants.

2 C. B. 168.)

Judgment for the claimant. burn, Mellor, Brett, and Grove, JJ.), gave judgThe Vice-CHANCELLOR held that the trains, so Attorneys for the claimant, Rogerson and Ford. ment affirming the decision of the court below. far as they were passenger trains, were under the

Decision affirmed. control of the company. The demands of the

Attorneys for the plaintiff, Chester and Urquhart, post office, and the rights of the plaintiff might

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

11, Staple-inn, W.C., agents for Lace, Banner, and conflict, but they were not irreconcilable. No

SECOND DIVISION OF THE COURT.

Co., Liverpool. doubt the company might be put to expense, but RENNISON v. WALKER AND ANOTHER.

Attorneys for the defendants, Merdediths and they must fulfil their engagements. He should, Issue directed to County Court-Joinder of several Roberts, New.square, Lincoln’s-inn, W.C., agents therefore, grant an injunction to restrain them

defendants-Power of County Court to amend, for Wise and Dawbarn, March, from carrying passengers past Swindon station

Common Law Procedure Act 1852, s. 37. by trains which might for the time be lawfully re- The plaintiff had brought an action for money quired to stop there for any shorter time than ten lent against two defendants, one of whom suffered

CASTLE AND OTHERS v. PLAYFORD. minutes. Solicitors : Carter and Bell; Young, Maples, plaintiff proceeded in his action by declaring judgment to go against him by default, and the Vendor and purchaser-Marine contract-Vendor

to ship cargo and forward bills of lading-Pur Teesdale, Veison, and Co.

against the other defendant under the 33rd section chaser on receipt of bills to take on himself all of the Common Law Procedure Act 1852. The risks and dangers of the seas, fc.-Agreement to

defendant declared against, who had appeared, buy and receive cargo on arrival-Payment on Saturday, Feb. 10. Dixon v. Enoch.

pleaded never indebted, and the issue in that plea delivery-Loss of cargo-Liability of purchaser Demurrer-Libel-Bill of discovery-6 & 7 Will. 4 the County Court.

was sent down by the Superior Court for trial in -Construction of contract-Condition precedent.

At the trial the learned DECLARATION on an agreement made between the c. 76, s. 19. This was demurrer; the question was whether there was evidence of the liability of the de. dant (described as

deputy County Court judge was of opinion that plaintiffs (described as "vendors ") and the defenthe defendant, the publisher of a newspaper, could fendant declared against, but that there was

“ purchaser'') whereby the

vendors agreed to ship a cargo of fresh water ice be compelled, by a bill in equity, to discover the not any evidence of the joint liability of the in square blocks, say cargo per result 170 register names of the proprietors, in order to enable the tivo original defendants, and he also thought tons, more or less, at vendor's option,” to be displaintiff to proceed against them by action at law that he had no power to amend by striking out patched with all speed to any ordered port, &c., for libel. The bill which was filed in pursuance of the defendant who had suffered judgment to go

the vendors forwarding bills of lading to the purthe provisions of 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 76, s. 19, and by default, and he thereupon directed a verdict to chaser, and upon receipt thereof “the said pur: 32 & 33 Vict. c. 24, prayed relief accordingly, be entered for the defendant, and a rule nisi chaser takes upon himself all risks and dangers of The defendant demurred generally for want of having been obtained thereupon for a new trial,

the seas, rivers, and navigation of whatever nature equity, principally on the ground that he was a Willis for the defendant showed cause against or kind soever.” And the defendant agreed to perfect stranger to the proposed action, and not it, and

bay and receive the said ice on its arrival at a party to it ; that if he could thus be compelled to make discovery in equity, anyone whom an in

McCall for the plaintiff, supported his rule. ordered port, and to pay for the same in cash on terested plaintiff at law might suspect, how. BB.), made the rule absolute for a new trial, on

The Court (Bramwell, Channell

, and Pigott, delivery, at the rate of 20s. per ton, weighed on

board during delivery. The declaration then ever slightly, of matters relating to the action, might be forced to say almost anything; and

the ground that the County Coạrt judge had averred shipment of the cargo and forwarding of lastly, because the bill did not state that the power to amend under the Common Law Proce- the bills of lading, and receipt of the said bills by

dure Act 1852, sect. 37, and their Lordships di. the defendant, and that the cargo was afterwards plaintiff was going to bring an action at law rected that the parties should discuss the terms lost during the voyage by the risks and dangers against the defendant.

of the amendment and of the new trial, before a of the seas,” yet the plaintiff had not paid the Horace Davey for the demarrer. judge at chambers.

value of the said cargo ; and further, he had not Greene, Q.C. and Jolitfe for the bill.

Poule absolute accordingly. taken upon himself the risks and dangers of the The VICE-CHANCELLOR overruled the demurrer.

Attorney for the plaintiff

, Apps, 7, South-square, seas,” &c., whereby, &c., (allegation of damage). Solicitors: F. Robinson ; W. M. Hacon. Gray's-inn, W.C.

Plea (amongst othered.as ir naudofcvùnt 10-
Attorney for the defendant, Evan Hare, 2, John always readlo argainst Sir P. Tait, in the Court of
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
street, Bedford-row, W.C.

sovuequer in Ireland, on the ground that Lynch,

being one of the creditors whose name appeared Tuesday, Feb. 13.

nent as a creditor under a deed of inspectorship entered GALLON METROPOLITAN BOARD WORKS. EXCHEQUER CHAMBER.

into between Sir Peter Tait and Co. and their Evidence of negligence-Injury caused by third

ERRORS FROM THE EXCHEQuremises at creditors in the year. At the time this injunction

Thursday, Feb. 1. vure under a party.

was granted an action had been commenced This was an action tried before Blackburn, J., in

BURROWS v. THE MARCH Cosor; the mort against Lynch by certain members of another Kent. The defendants had constructed & sewer,

COMPANY (Linivided for forfeiture firm, viz., Tait, Abraham, and Co., of which Sir P.

Tait was also a member, and the Chief Judge with a man-hole, in a street. The hole was fas: Negligence-Acciilent from .s, one of which was tened with a lock, which, however, was not suffi.

butory negligence of thiaer, should not permit a granted an injunction to restrain the further pro. ciently secure to prevent its being opened by

jointly with defenlcplace in the house; another secution of that action also.

ilent-Remoteness oald be paid within a certain Thesiger now moved, on behalf of the firm of Tait, anyone who tried. Some person unknown un.

of contract. fastened the lock and left the hole open ; the

claimed upon breach of both Abraham, and Co., to dissolve the last-mentioned plaintiff passing in the dark fell in. The Judge at The plaintiff eny defendant paid the rent due, injunction, in order that they might proceed in

their action. He argued that the deed of inspec. the trial rnled that there was no evidence of negli necessary wor\xed costs, into court upon an gence against the defendants, but he allowed the premises, the under the Common Law Procedure torship placed Sir P. Tait in such a position with case to proceed in order to fix the amount, should custom, supaintiff however refused to accept it. regard to his liabilities, that from the moment it

was signed he was as frec to act as if it had never the court think it was a case for a jury. The leading frøs found for the plaintiff, but leave verdict for plaintiff was found at £300, and leave the plaind to enter for the defendant, on the been entered into, provided that he did nothing to

and layin first, that there had been no breach compromise any interests which were protected by was reserved to enter that verdict accordingly. Harkins, Q.C. and Philbrick, for the defendants, fittings. renant concerning a sale by auction, and, the deed. Moreover, this debt, in respect of which

the occa
that by claiming a forfeiture for non.

the action was brought against Lynch, was a debt showed canso against the rule obtained in pur-dants to rent the plaintiff waived the forfeiture incurred subsequently to the deed, and to a totally suance of the leave. Prentice, Q.C. and Warlon, supported the rule. Igasli che other breach. The Court of Queen's different firm.

Bagley appeared for Lynch, and contended that JJ.), considerel that the verdict was rightly theiently discharged the rule which they granted it would be a great hardship if the action by The Court (Blackburn, Mellor, and Hannen; the refused a rule on the first ground, and sub

Lynch were to be restrained, and the action

tum entered for the defendants. Rule discharged. thSaylis (with Prentice), Q.C. argued for defen. against him permitted. He cited the Bankruptcy Attorney for plaintiff, J. Jones. pent, the appellant.

Repeal Act (32 & 33 Vict. c. 83), s. 20. Attorney for defendants, W. W. Smith.

Brown. Q.C. (with Rose), for the plaintiff, was Little, Q.C. appeared for the inspectors, and
at heard.

asked for their costs of the motion.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
The COURT (Kelly, C.B., Bramwell and Channell,

The CHIEF JUDGE said that there was no kind
Friday, Feb. 9.

BB , Byles and Keating, JJ., Pigott, B., Brott, J. of connection between the circumstances under MOGER V. ESCOTT.

Cleasby, B. and Grove, J.) considered that the which the two actions respectively were brought. Borough vote-Successive occupationsPayment o that there was no waiver of the forfeiture on the and Co. two years after the deed of inspection

first breach of covenant had been established, and Mr. Lynch became indebted to Tait, Abraham rates. This was an appeal from the decision of t1 grounds stated by the court below, as reported in was settled. Consequently, no sum which ho revising barrister. Moger claimed to be inserte L. Rep. 6 Q. B. 215.

could claim under that deed could be set off in the list of voters for Bath. It was

Judgment offirmed. againgst the latter debt. The inspectors were he had occupied a house. 13, Paradise.street, fell Attorneys for plaintiff, Reed and Lovell. entitled to their costs of the motion, but there long time up to Feb. 1871, at a rent of 60m, Attorney for defendant, J. Ellerton.

oved tre

would be no other order as to costs.

V.

OF

9

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

Solicitors for Sir P. Tait and Co., Linklater, LEGISLATION AND JURIS

siderable reduction should be made in the number Hackwood and Co.

PRUDENCE,

of high bailiffs and registrars. 5. That a redac. Solicitors for Mr. Lynch, Bignall and Horton.

tion should be made in the number of County Solicitors for the inpectors, Sampson and Cul

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Court Judges, and a new arrangement made of lingford.

the districts of County Courts, and of the circuits Tuesday, Feb. 14.

of County Court Judges, and offices substituted
THE APPOINTJIENT OF SIR ROBERT COLLIER. for courts, where the amount of business is not
Monday, Feb. 12.
Lord PORTMAN gave notice that he would move

sufficient to justify the continuance of a court. Ec parte BROWN; Re SCRIVENER. an amendment to the motion of Earl Stanhope.

RESOLUTIONS PASSED 8TH MARCH, 1871. Bankruptcy Act 1869, s. 15, cl. 5Oroler and dis. this House finds no good cause for the passing of High Court of Justice be established for each of The amendment would be to this effect :-“ That

SUPERIOR COURTS.-6. That a branch of the position-keputed ownership. This was an appeal by the trustee of the bank. a Parliamentary censure on the conduct of the

two districts to be formed out of the counties of Government in the recent appointment of Sir Tupt's estate against an order of the Judge of the Robert Collier" to a Judgeship of the Common Lancaster and York, and the parts of Cheshire County Court of Bedford, declaring that certain agricultural machines were not in the order and Pleas and subsequently to a seat in the Judicial adjacent to Lancashire, and the counties north of

Lancashire and Yorkshire, such districts to be disposition of the bankrupt at the time of his Committee of the Privy Council.”

styled respectively the north-west and north-east bankruptcy with the consent of the true owner.

THE ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.

districts of the High Court. 7. That two judges of The bankrupt and a person named Shepherd had

Lord Cairns, for the Earl of SHAFT ESBURY, the High Court (who shall, unless any other ar. for some time prior to the year 1868 carried on a

reintroduced two Bills having reference to the rangement be made among the judges of the High partuership business for the purpose of letting Ecclesiastical Courts.

Court, be the junior judges for the time being) out for hire to the neighbouring farmers thrashing

shall discharge the duties connected with the said and other agricultural machines, &c. During the

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

districts, and shall each be paid a sum of £ continuance of the partnership the partners hau

Monday, Feb. 13.

in addition to salary, to meet the extra expenses purchased from an agricultural engineer named THE TRANSLATION OF SIR R. COLLIER.

connected with residence in either of the said dis. Perkins, residing at Hitchin, several machines, with

Sir ROUNDELL PALMER gave notice that on

tricts. 8. That if, and as may be, necessary, in which the partners proposed to carry on their busi. Monday the 19th, when the hon. member for South. order to meet the requirements of judicial service ness. Upon the dissolution of the partnership; in West Lancashire brought on his motion with in the said districts, one more judge, or two more 1868, there was owing to Perkins, who still owed reference to the appointinent of Sir Robert Collier, judges, of the High Court should be appointed. about £670 for machines previously purchased; and he would move as an amendment, "That this 9. That the plaintiff in any cause in the High as a security for this debt the bankrupt gave him a bill of sale over the machines in question, whereby censure on the conduct of the Government in the House finds no just cause for Parliamentary Court may mark or lay the venue of the same for

or in either of the said districts (subject to re. the mortgagee was enabled to take possession of recent appointment of Sir Robert Collier to a

moval for sufficient cause), and thereupon the trial gagor upon the service of a written notice ; but seat upon the Judicial Comınittee of the Privy rules of the High Court be heard before one judge, the property in default of payment by the mort. judgeship in the Court of Common Pleas and to a of the said cause, and all interlocutory and other

proceedings therein, which can according to the that in the mean time, and until default, the mort.

Council.” gagor was to have the use of the machines for the

PRIVATE BILLS (IRELAND).

and also the Admiralty business, if any, in the purposes of his business. There was also the

Mr. Pim (in the absence of Mr. Maguire) asked district, which would be tried at present on cir:

said district, and all criminal business within the usual clause in the deed for redemption of the property, and

a covenant for repayment by the the First Lord of tho Treasury whether the cuit, shall be disposed of by the judge of the High mortgagor. This bill of sale was duly registered, Government intended to propose any measure

Court in such district. 10. That any cause not and the mortgagor was not indebted at the time with the object of having private Bills dealt with marked for or of which the venue

is not laid in he executed it. Perkins also held as a further in Dublin ? - Mr. GLADSTONE : It is the inten- either of the said districts, may nevertheless be security the written guarantee of a Mr. Hanscomb, tion of the Government to make proposals, as I

sent for trial, or for any other specified purpose, a large farmer in the neighbourhood, who made hope in the present Session, with a view to facili. to one of the said district courts, by order of a considerable use of the machines; and it was

tate the progress of such business as is usually judge. 11. That, with the exception of the times agreed between him and the bankrupt that the dealt witli by private Bills in the case of Ireland, of vacation and of the circuits after mentioned, latter should hand to Hanscomb the amounts

not upon tho ground that there is anytbing in the courts in each of the said districts shall sit received for the hire of the machines should

the case of Ireland which is in principle distinct continuously, the court of the north-west district be paid to the mortgageo in reduction of the from the case of the other portions of the United at Liverpool, Manchester

, or Preston, and the mortgage debt and interest ; and whenever Hans. Kingdom, but on the ground that it is extremely court of the north-east district at Sheffield, Leeds, comb hired the machines he should debit himself desirable to lighten, wherever, it can unobjec. or York, and that at the times of circuit the two with the amount of the hire. The machines tionably be done, the hands of this

House, and to judges of the said district shall join and become generally travelled about under the charge of a

promote and expedite the transaction of business. judges of assize for all the assize towns to the servant of the bankrupt, who took the money for (Hear, hear:) I am not prepared to say how far north of Preston and York respectively. 12. That their hire, the bills being made out and headed in it wil be in the power of my noble friend (the rules should be made for the trial or hearing of the bankrupt's naine. Upon one occasion, when because the subject is one which goes into a good applications therein, at the places ana in the Chief Secretary of Ireland) to carry his measure,

cases in the said districts, and of interlocutory some of the machines were in Hanscomb's premises, they were seized under an execution issued deal of detail, and I don't wish to raise any pre

manner most convenient to the suitors. 13. That against the bankrupt, and upon the trial at the mature or excessive expectations. But it is not

a re-arrangement of the circuits, omitting the said County Court upon an interpleader summons the proposed to proceed until my hon, friend the districts and that of the metropolis, be made. machines were awarded to Hanscomb. Upon this Chairman of Committee (Mr. Dodson) has given

RESOLUTIONS PASSED 8TH JAN. 1872. state of facts, the judge of the County Court de effect to the pledge which he has entered into with

COUNTY COURTS.-14. That the report be cided that Hanscomb was entitled to retain these the House of Commons--namely, that he will on machines as against the trustee under the bank- business for consideration and discussion in this a very early day raise the whole subject of private for the present registrars of paid registrars

adopted so far as it recommends the substitution ruptcy. Against this decision the trustee ap. House. After that has been done, we think it

at fixed salaries to perform the duties in pealed.

and far as it De Ger, Q.C. and Cooper, for the trustee. There matter better than at present; but until then we will be possible for us to see our way in this the report mentioned,

recommends the consolidation of County was no evidence to show that the property in shall not arrive at any positive decision as to the Court districts, which, in the opinion of the comthese machines was vested in Hanscomb. They mode of proceeding.

mission, is practicable and desirable, although the cited Harnsby v. Miller, 1 El. & Ell. 192 ; Freshney v. Carrick, 1H. & N. 653; Stackman v. Miller,

Tuesday, Feb. 14.

exact amount of consolidation and consequent

saving will have to be determined hereafter in 12 C.B., N. S., 659.

detail in any legislative measure introduced for Bagley and Webster appeared for Hanscomb.

Mr. M‘LAGAN asked the Secretary of State for carrying the report into effect. 15. That the They contended that the bill of sale was held oy the Home Department whether it was his intention County Courts in future should administer common Perkins as a trustee for Hanscomb. It was the to move for the appointment of a Select Com. law, equity, and Admiralty jurisdiction as one interest of Hanscomb to keep the machines in the mittee to inquire into the operation of the Game system, in accordance with the recommendations neighbourhood. The baukrupt was perfectly Lars this session. ---Mr. BRUCE feared it would made in relation to the supreme court by the first solvent when he executed the bill of sale, which not be in his power to undertake the charge of report of this commission. therefore ought to be protected : Ec parte Homan, this heavy inquiry, but a motion for a Committee

RESOLUTIONS PASSED 23RD JAN. 1972. re Broadbent (L. Rep. 12 Eq. 598).

on the subject would not be objected to by the
Government.

COUNTY COURTS.–16. That the County Conrts The CHIEF JUDGE said that he could only differ

be annexed to and form branches of the High from the decision arrived at by the judge of the THE JUDICATURE COMMISSION. Court, and the judges and registrars of the County County Court upon clear and distinct evidence. The following important resolutions have occn. Courts respectively be attached to and be officers In all the previous proceedings in bankruptcy, pied the attention of the Judicature Commission of the High Court, and (subject to general rules) Perkins had treated the bankrupt as sole debtor ; | for many months, and were finally agreed to on

respectively continue to have and exercise all the expenses connected with the repairing of the the 31st of last month :

such jurisdiction as they respectively now possess, machines had been charged to the bankrupt as RESOLUTIONS PASSED 1st MATCH, 1871.

together with such further and other jurisdiction the true owner. As long as the partnership sub

as recommended. 17. That in any action for the sisted, there was no question that the property in County Court, in addition to his present powers,

COUNTY COUrts.-1. That the registrar of the recovery of debt or damages exceeding £20, prothe machines was vested in the partners, and should have power to dispose of the following or of any County Court, although the appearance

cells may be issued at any office of the High Court fact from which it could be inferred that the business (subject to exceptions for special cause), of other matter required is to be, or to be perproperty in them had passed into other hands. both parties agree that the registrar may decide. limit of the jurisdiction of the County Court is

viz:-(a) Claims under £5. (b) Cases in which forined, elsewhere. *18. That wlierc the existing This fact alone would be sufficient to decide the That all other business up to the present limit £20, the same should be extended to £30: 19. question. The guarantee given by Hanscomb should be disposed of by the judge: and that That where the existing limit of the jurisdiction 125 inconsistent with his claim of ownership. plaintiffs should be allowed to contence pro of the County Court is 210, the same should be With regard to the interpleader summons, the ceedings in the County Court, whatever be the extended to £50, sole question decided by it was that the execution. nature of the suit, and whatever the amount, the County Court as last mentioned shall not be

20. That such jurisdiction of creditor was not entitled to the goods. The case came within the terms of the statute; the goods leaving it for the defendant to remove for cause limited to certain kinds of torts, but should were within the order and disposition of the shown into the Superior Court, if it involves a

extend to all actions of tort. bankrupt at the time of his bankruptcy. The court fees should be revised, and should be col. sum exceeding the presenů limit. 2. That the

RESOLUTIONS PASSED 20TH JAN. 1872. order of the County Court judge must therefore lected by stamps. 3. That the parties should be be discharged.

County Courts.-21. That if in any action in allowed to serve their own process, other than the High Court the plaintiff shall recover a film Solicitors for the trustee, Scargill. Solicitors for Mr. Hanscomb, Hare, agent for be made for the speedy abolition of the office of shall not oxcoed the smount which he would have

writs of execution. 4. That arrangements should not exceeding £50, the costs (if any) allowed him Wades, Hitchin.

treasurer of the County Courts; and that a con. been allowed if the action hed becn commenced

[ocr errors]

GAME LAWS.

:

and prosecuted in the County Court, unless a judge were actually dead. Held, that by presenting a

Rrsarouta (John), Fir Grange-house, near Harrogate, shall otherwise order. 22. That a judge may petition for liquidation under the provisions of the

York, veoman. March 1; S.C. F. and C. A. Powell, solici.

tors, Harrogate. March 13; M. R. at eleven o'clock. order the plaintiff to compensate the defendant Bankruptcy Act 1869, F. B. C. had incurred a for

SHEPPARD (Thonas B.), Canon Honse, Berkeley, Glonfor any additional costs incurred by him in con. feiture of his life estate : (Re Lady Amherst's cester, rezistrar of births, deaths, and marriages. March sequence of the action not having been commenced Will, 25 L. T. Rep. N. S. 870. V.C. B.)

1: Gaisford and Scott, solicitors, Berkeley. March 11

V.C. W., at two o'clock. and prosecuted in the County Court. 23. 'That in all actions commenced and prosecuted in the RESTITUTION SUIT-NO ANSWER OF RESPON. SMITH Rev. Ebenezer, Barton St. David, Somerset, clerk,

March 7; W. R. and H. A. Greys, solicitors, Kirkby

- No

DENT - CASE High Court, in which he amount recovered, or

TRIED OUT OF ITS TURN - Lonsdale, Cumberland, March 21; M. Rar ten o'clock. sought to be recovered, docs not exceed £100, NOTICE TO RESPONDENT-REHEARING-RULES

STONES (Richard), Ulceby, Lincoln, and Kingston-npon.

Hull, brass founder, March 10; Lee and Thorney', sulicitbe costs (if any be recoverable) shall be taxed on 50 AND 116.-In a suit for restitution the wife filed

tors, Hull. March 18; V.C. W., at twelve o'clock a lower scale than that from time to time applic. no answer. On the application of the husband the

Thousoy (James, South Norwood, Surrer, metal broker. able to other actions in the High Court, unless a

case was tried out of its turn as an undefended March 11; J. H. James, solicitor, 02. Lincoln's-inn-fields, judge shall otherwise order.

cause, without any notice being given to the wife, W.C, Jinrch 16; V.C. W., at twelve o'clock. LOCAL Courts.-24. That the jurisdiction of and a decree pronounced in his favour. The wife

Walker (William), 233, Essex-road, Islington, Middlesex,

doctor of medicine. March 15; Walker and Co., solicitors, the Chancellor's conrts of the Universities of subsequently applied for a rehearing on an affi.

3, Southampton street, Bloomsbury, W.C. March 21; Oxford and Cambridge should be abolished, in davit, which disclosed a substantial defence to the V.C. W., at iwelve o'clock. respect of all actions, suits, or matters cog

suit, and the court, on the technical ground of nisable in the Superior or County Courts. 25.

want of notice, reversed the decree, and directed That the jurisdiction of the Court of the Vice. the case to be reheard : (Keane v. Keanc, 25 L. T.

CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 Vict. c. 35. Warden of the Stannaries should be transferred Rep. N. S. 857. Div.)

Last Day of Claim, and to whom Particulars to be sent. to the courts or judges exercising bankruptcy

Ashwin (Edward), Knightwick, Worcester, provision dealer.

JUDGMENT CREDITOR-27 & 28 VICT. C. 112, March 8; R. J. w. Pitt, solicitor, 91, High-street, Worjurisdiction within the Stannaries of Devon and

8. 4-WRIT OF ELEGIT-SEIZURE OF SUPER- cester Cornwall 26. That the jurisdiction of the

ATWOOD John C.), Shelden-street, Paddington, Middlesex, FLUOUS LANDS OF A RAILWAY COMPANY.-A Mayor's Court of the City of London, the Passage

and 4, Impasse Moulin Joli, Belleville, Paris. March 19; railway company incorporated by an Act passed in Simpson and Cullingford, solicitors, 83, GracechurchCourt of Liverpool, the Tolzey Court of Bristol,

1859, employed a contractor to construct their street, E.C. and the Salford Hundred Court of Record should line of railway, and became indebted to him in a

Austis Ge.). Shefford, Bedford, nttorner-at-law. March 4;

A, S. Wade.Gery, solicitor', Sherford, Beds. be abolished in respect of all actions, suits, or large amount. In 1869 the contractor recovered BAYLISS (Elizabeth, Clevedon-cottnye. Peckham · rye, matters cognisable in the superior or County judgment in an action for the sum remaining due

Surrey, March 1; Lowlcas and Co., solicitors, 20, Martin's. Courts. 27. That all other local and inferior

lane, Cannon-street, E.C. to him, and in the following year he issued a writ BUCKLEY Anoa, , Dacre-park, Blackheath, Kent, and courts of civil jurisdiction should be abolished.

of elegit, under which he seized certain superfluous ö, Levisham - ter ace, Lewisham, Kent, and %. DorsetRESOLUTIONS PASSED 31ST JAN. 1872. lands belonging to the company. These lands had

terrace, Clapham-road, Surrey. Alarch 30; J, Mole, soli. 23. That the Court of Common Pleas at Lan.

ci or, %, Sout..square, Gray's-inn, W.C. been acquired by the company under an Act passed BUNSELL" Henry T.), Rozs. Herefori, corn factor. March 2; caster and the Court of Pleas at the County Pala. in 1863, whereby they were empowered to extend

S. R. Davies, solicitor, Ross, tine of Durham should be abolished. the Admirulty Court of the Cinque Ports should 39shohind their line of railway, and whereby it was provided BURTON Clas, Esq., MP For Warren, Cobharn, Surrey.

March 11; Dawes and Sons, solicitors, 9, Angel-court, that the works thereby aathorised to be con. Thro morton-street, E.C. be abolished. 30. That it is desirable that regis. structed, should, for financial purposes, form a

Caxtor Israel), 97, Raven-street, Whitechapel, Middlesex, trics or offices of the High Court for the transaction

sponge nuracturer. March 46; F. W. Hilbury, solici. separate undertaking, and that the capital and tor, 32, Crutched Friars, Middlesex. of interlocutory and other business to be defined

new shares created under the powers thereof, CLARK Daniel should be established in certain places to be should constitute a separate capital. On a petition COOKE Isaac, Moulton, Antendyke, Moulton, Lincoln,

West, Anderton, Corn rall, gentleman.

May 15 : Grane and Son, sollcitors, 23, Bedford-row, W.C., named from time to time. The registrars or presented by the contractor under the 4th section farmer au razier. March 31 ; Caparn and Willders officers at such registries or offices to be the registrars of the County Courts when thought the lands seized under the writ, and for payment of the 27 & 28 Vict. c. 112, praying for a sale of solicitors, Holberch,

CROZIER lol. Rawson J.), 28, Cambridee-street, Hyde-park, fit, or persons specially appointed for such pur

W. March 11; R. B. Wneatlay, solicitor, 7, New-inn, of the judginent debt out of the proceeds of sale: Strand, W.C. pose. 31. That the district registries of the Held, that the objection that the lands seized

Drsos Samuel), Gray's-inn-square, W.C., and Glanmire Probate Court be abolished, and their business under the writ had been acquired by the company

House, Ramsgate, Kent, gentleman. March 25; Deaton transferred to the registrie's established under

and Co., solicitors, 11, Gray's.iun.square, W.C. under their Act relating to an undertaking of the Evans John, Moselei, Worcester, factor. March !: Sannthe foregoing resolution, and when so such registry company distirot from that in respect of which the

ders and Bradbury, solicitors, 41, Cherry-street, Birmingis established, then to the registry of some County

hon. debt was incnrred, was no defence to the petition. FAULKNER (David', Nechells-park-road, Birninsham, gunCourt.

Order of Wickens. V.C., directing the usnal barrel :naker, March 1; Saunders and Bikibury, solici. inquiries, accordingly affirmed : (Re Ogilvie, 25

tors, 11, Cherry.street, Birmingham.

FEEXEY Jolin F. , Church.road. Ed:baston, near BirmingESTATE AND INVESTMENT L. T. Rep. N. S. 860. Chan.)

hum, newspaper proprietor. March it; Suuntersaud Brad.

bury, solicitors, 11, Cherry-street, Birmingham. JOURNAL

FOLEY (Henry'!, Esq., Tenby, Perasroke. March 11; R. B.
USCLAIMED STOCK AND DIVIDENDS IN THE

Wheatly, icitor 7. X-w-inn, Strand, W.('.
BANK OF ENGLAND.

GILLART traucis . Park-cottuse, Culmine, Loimall, mine

arent. Marc l; F. V. Ludze, solici.or, Princes-street, REPORTS OF SALES.

Transferred to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the Truro. [NOTE. - The reports of the Estate Exchange are officially

Sun Dei's. 21 which will lyril to the persons Goss (George), Esq., 3, East India-avenus, Leadenhall.

reperirelr whose names are prefised to eard in three Auctioneers whoxe uanie. enoplied in the following list.

strett, E.C. March 30; G. Carew, solicito. 9, Lincoln's. are registered there will oblige us reports of their own months, unless other cisiinants soner appear.]

inn selds, w..

GOULDER Tecnie), Rock-benth, Yorfolk, aad 34, Canter. Bales.)

BERRY Geo., yeoman. suri WINDYDISK (

G.), Inbourer,

burs-place, Linbethrowl, Surrey.
Tuesday, Feb. 6.
buth of Facun, Hamshire. 13 os. 2., Threo Der

H:GGINSON Edmund, E41. Saltinatshe Castle. Hereford By Messrs. FAREBROTHER, Clark, and Co., at the Mart. Cant. Annnities. Claimants, said Geo. Berry and Geo.

und Lansdowne rove, Bath. April 20; Walters und Co.. Hait. ller Lynilhuesi. freeaold residential eslace of Winitsink

solicitors.!, Lincolu'n-inn. W.C. 04.1r. 1:3p-uld for €301). FORBES (Chas.), Esg.. Chichester, S11ases. 9151 10., Three

HILLMAN Frances,!, Denbich-road, Bayswater, Middlesex. Freehold farm of la.or19p.-sold for £1700. Per Cent. Anoniting, Claiman, Tas Ward R:15sell.

March 95; Kinsey ant Adle, solicitors, 9, Bloomsbury. A lot of land, containing ja. Ir. áp.-sold for £200. Santos Frederico Ferreira Silva), Cse., Maranbam, Brazil,

plice, W.C. Allit o of 22. Ir. lp. - sold for LSI.

a minor. Lilu11.. Ver Threr bor Cat. Aonuities

JET** Christiana M.), 7, Stapletou-place, Stapleton-road, Å litio, containi:i:a. Ir. 5p.-sold for 21:30, Clrimant, said Frederico Ferreira Silva Santos, now of

Bristol, May ; R. S. Carr, solicitor; 7, St. Mildred'sHill Fa m, containin: 25:a. Ir. 9.4., freehuld--sold for £40).

court, Poultry, E.C. ute.

KERSOCK Edwiu , Kingston-upon-Thames, anctioneer, &c. IV erinexday, Feh. 7.

March so: Sheppard and Riley, soicitors, s, Moorgate. By Mezars, XORTOX, TRIST, WATSCY, and Co., at the Mart. APPOINTMENTS UNDER THE JOINT-STOCK

street, E.C. R tieruithe inhancery , freehold cottage properties--Nos.

WINDING-UP ACTS.

MAISTEM (Everetta C.), Sheet, near Ludlow, March 3; 111., Oak-placa-sold for L. Oak Cottage, with garlen, &c.-wold for £130. British NATION LIFC ASSURANCE ASSOCIATION (LIMITED).

L. I. Clark, solicitor, Ludlow.

MATTITEWN (Deborah), Lowther-street, Carlisle.
Cre litors to send in by Marel! their names and aldr ses

April 1;
A plot of buildin: land-old for 115.
Non, land, Oak-cotta resold for £0.
and the particulars of their claims to Cooper and Whiffin,

J. R. Donald, solicitor, Carlisle. The Oak Dairy--solil for £170).

14, Georyp.street. Mansion House, E.C., the liquidators

MILBOURNE Thon.), Esq., Theresa-terrace, Hammereinith,

Middlesex. of the said association.

Feb. 29); Tippetts and Sons, solicitors: 5, Nos. 43, 19 to 53, Clarence-streat-sold for £1923.

Great St. Thomas Apostle, Queen-street, Cheapside, E.C. Thursday, Fe'. 8.

MORSON Jane ,, inbourne.rond, St. John's road, Dept. By Mo srs.WIXSTANLEY and HORWOD, at the Mart. CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCÉRY. ford, Kent. March 9; J. L. Puliing, solicitor, 3, AdelaideTin shares in the Auction Mart Company fully paid up

place, King Willian-street, E.C. solil for CIO.

LAST DAY OF PROOF.

NEVILL Wm., E-q.. Winchester,: Rear:Almiral in IIer Ma. Four ditto-old for £32.

BERNERS (Right Hon. Henry William Baron), Kerthorpe. jesty's Riwal Nary. March 23; C. Wouldridge and Soa, By Messrs. NEWBOX and HARDING.

hall, Leicester.
March ; H. J. Francis, solicitor, 30,

Wah ber.
Islington-Xo. :97, Liverpool road, term 32 years--sold for Lincolu's-inn-fields, W.C. March 16; M.R., at eleven

NOATEN John E., M.D., Chester. March 31; W. and w. o'clock.

H. l'. Brosu, solicitors, Chester.
By Messrs. C. C. and T. MOORE.

CALTON (James), Brenchley, Kent, farmer, Marchl; Pryke PARLNY Liert. Col. Geo. F.!, :1, Westbourne-place, Mid.
Stener.Yos. I to 30, St. James's-placa, term 67 years- and Co. solicitors. 47. Lincoln's-inn-tiell., W.C. March dlesex. March 6; Price and Co., solicitors, l, New
for e1y.
V.C. W., at ten o'clock.

sonare. Lincoln's inn, W.C. No. !9i, Oxford-street, term 30 years--sold for (203. DEWASAP (Jark. Chaudfontaine, Liege, in Belgium, bar.

Pike Wm.tiWall-street, Camberwell. Surrey, conLimehonse.Xos. 13 ani 14, George-street, copshold-sold risternt law, March 5: Murton, solicitor, 1:). S011th. trncior and dairyının, March 27; P. Wood, solicitor, 45,

ampton-street, Bloomsbury, London March 11, V.C M., Fenchurch-street, E.C.
Trexilon, Fei. B.
at trelre o'clock,

PRICE (Sarah, !, Glenall-terrace, Old Kent-road, Surrey.
By Messrs. DEBESHAM, TEW-Ox, and FARMER, nt the Mart. FENTIAM (James), The Walla, Hampton court, Middlesex, March 1!; J. Jote, solicitor, !, Walbrook. E.C.
Binckuath, the lease vi Vanbrush-cottage, torin six years— gentleman. March 1; H. H. Lawrence, solicitor, 34, RAVEN Charlotte, 7), Henningtord-road, Islington, Middle.
suil for £10).

Bedford-square, W.C. March 20; V.C. W. at twelve Rex. March :3; Kinsey and Ade, solicitors, !, Blooinsbury. l'elelaw, Fel. 11. o'clock.

ploce, W.C. By Mes re. Enwix Foxant BOUNFIELO, at the Mort. FRINSEDY (Frederick R.), 97, London.rnal, Croprion, SAVARY nohn), Esq., 29. Susses-placa, Regent's park, X.W. Kent, Aglesford -The lease of the Meira, Brick and Cement Surrey, and 113, Canon-street. E.C. wholesale bristle and Chelstreet, Belgrave-Maare, Jhindisex March Works, teher with the plant and in chinery, aad ji acres merchan: and brn-h manuf:ucturer. March 1: Walker and .: Blachare and Son, solicitors Alresford, Hants. of land, ierin 114 years--sold for 40.

Martin-an, solicitors. 15. King's-road, Gray's-inn, W.C. Scurt Alexander), Valley-mills, Morles, Baldes, and Leeds,
March 11: V.C. W., at one o'clock.

cloth manufuturer. April 20: H. Snowdon, solicitor, 13, GARRETT Henry, Rath,'ventleman. Feb. 29: E. T. Payne, East Parade, Leeds.

solicitor, Bath. March 7; V.C. W., at telpa o'clock. STEPHENS (Robert), 13, The Parngon, Bath, gentleman.

HARGREAVES Gen) Wattou. Norfolk, surgeon, March 7;
SOLICITORS' JOURNAL.

March 1: Hendersou aud Salinoo, solicitors, i), Brond-
WM. Barton, solicitor. East Dereham, Norfolk. March 14; street, Bristol.
V.C. M. at twelve o'clock.

STEIKENS (Robert), 1:3, The Paragon Bath, gentleman. NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS.

KAIN (James P.1, Morecambe, Lancaster, contructor. March March 1; Anderson and Salmon, solicitors, 50), Broad.

4; Sharp and Son, solicitor, Lancaster. March 20; V.C. street, Bristol. TVILL-LEGACY--FORFEITURE CLAUSE---PETI. W., a' noon.

STIRLING (Lient.-Col. Win.), 2. Monat-le-Grand, Henvitree, TIOX FOR LIQUIDATION - FORFEITURE. – A

Feb.
LEVY Isaac , :, Roren-row. Whitechapel, Miilillesex.

Devon. March 1; T. J. Bremridge, solicitor, Bampfylde

; J. Smith, solicitor, 19, White Lion-street, Norton. street, Exeter. legacy was bequeathed to trustees upon trust to folrate, E. March 14: V.C. wat twelve r'clock.

STRIDLEY Martin P.), Bassett-street, Camborne, Cornwall, pay the income to F. B. C. for life, with remainder MCALPINE Logira), Colebrook Lodge, Hamlet-roarl, Urper accountant. March 6; F. V. Budge, solicitor, Princes

Norwood Surrey. Feb. 2; Danville and Co., solicitors, stret, Truro. to his children, with a proviso that if the said 6, New.square, Lincoln's-inn, W.C. March 4; V.C. W., at TINGEY Geo., Henlow, Bedford, grocer. March 11; A. S. F. B. C. should " at any time ..., assign over, one o'clock.

Wade Gery, solicitor, Shetford. assure, mortgage, or in any manner encumber, or

MILNES (Chns. G.), Beckingham, Lincoln. Feb. 21: New. TAYLOR Mary, Harvest-lanc, Sheffield. March 25; W. by any instrument in writing, parol agreement, or

bald and Co., sollcitors, Nottingham, March 1; V.C. B., and B. Wake, solicitor, Castle-street, Shemeld.
at twelvin'clock.

WESTOVER Geo.!, Culvers, Gillinghım, Dorset, yeoman. otherwise howsoever, part from the income of MACATTA (Emanuel, Feq., 91, Bloomfield-rond, Maida-hill, March 30: Bell and Frenne, solicitors, Gillingham, the trust fund, " or any part thereof, until the

Middlesex. March 5; Sampson, Samuel, anil Co., solicitors. WHITING Jas.1, Wilton, near Taunton, gentleman. March 36. Finsbury-circus, E.C. March 9; M.R. at twelve

21; Rose and Thomas, solicitors, 11. Salisbury-stret, same are actually du3, upon any pretence or in o'clock.

Strand, W.C. any manner whatsoever," then his interest in the

NICHOLS Richaril), 19, Upper Ebury-street, Pimlico, builder. WETHERALL Aaron , Pendleton, near Manchester, tensame should cease, and the fund go over as if he Marc! !; W. H Roberts, solicito Hi, Moorgate-street,

leader. March 1: Parry and Son, solicitors, la, King. E.C. March 10; J.R., at twelve clock.

street, Manchester,

for 6:6).

« EelmineJätka »