But the Q. B. held the provisions to be prospective, E. W. C. TO THE EDITOR OF THE LAW TIMES. SIR,-The discussion of Sir George Grey's Expenses of Prosecutions Bill, respecting the prohibition against clerks to committing justices being concerned in prosecutions, and the withdrawal of that clause. has caused me to consider the matter. under the 16th sec. of 8 & 9 Vict. c. 20, a WINDING UP. E. W. C. penses consequent upon employing an agent there; and when it is considered that the great majority of transactions, and those it is now sought to cheapen, are for purchases of small amount, such charges would form a considerable as well as an objectionable item in a solicitor's bill. Every objection, as it seems to me, would be met by forming local registries, so as to be within easy reach of every solicitor in the land, who in most transactions would be enabled, at little or trifling expense, to make the necessary searches and register. his own deeds, &c. This would be effected by con-stituting each County Court office throughout Eng-land and Wales a registry office. AN OLD SUBSCRIBER. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS OF MARRIED WOMEN. Two questions as to contributories were reported last week. In Ex parte Robinson, 17 Law T. 14. A. a director of a banking company, took twenty where most of the solicitors reside, they would be Placed in the principal towns in each district,. shares as a qualification for his office, and signed found most accessible; the machinery would easily. the deed in respect of them. Afterwards, in pur- be formed upon that at present in existence, and it suance of a resolution of the board, he signed a would prove the least costly to the public; while the letter agreeing to take 100 shares more, and gave a tri-monthly visits of the treasurer would be subserpromissory-note for 1,000l. in respect of these shares vient to the efficiency and general method of the payable within four years. The 100 shares were registry, so that all might be conducted on a uniform. not allotted, nor was the deed signed in respect of system. I refrain from trespassing further on your space The 102nd section of the Municipal Act renders them, but entries were made in his account at the clerks to borough justices, who by themselves or bank for dividends on account of these shares. on this subject, and beg respectfully to recommend their partners engage in prosecutions, where they The promissory note for 1,0007. was not, however, it to your consideration and that of the readers of the LAW TIMES. I remain Sir, yours, &c. act as clerks to committing justices, liable to a pe- met when due. He was held to be a contributory March 31, 1851. nalty. Now it seems nearly the same enactment in respect of the 100 shares. Vice-Chancellor was attempted to be applied to all justices' clerks BRUCE thought it "a very clear case," in which most throughout the kingdom by Sir George Grey's Bill, readers will agree with him. In Ex parte Holmes, but from opposition the clause was withdrawn, and 17 Law T. 14, A. the holder of shares in a banking I am told an amended clause was introduced when the Bill was reported regulating the circumstances company, transferred them to B. in January 1847. under which clerks to justices may be employed in Up to this time the balance-sheets shewed considerprosecutions. I hope it is not too late to obtain a able profits. On March 6, 1847, the bank susrepeal of the absurd prohibition in the Municipal pended payment, and the company was afterwards Act, for if it be wrong to extend it to county ordered to be wound up. In fact, there had been clerks, it is equally so to continue it to borough losses in the years 1845 and 1846. The question clerks. The House of Commons having repudiated raised upon this was whether A. was a contributory the principle, it is almost impossible to conceive what in respect of losses up to the day of the transfer. reason could be urged why all clerks to magistrates He was held by Vice-Chancellor BRUCE not to be so. should not be put upon the same footing. It would But this, we presume, was rather upon the special be only an act of justice to the borough clerks. facts of the case than upon principle. Surely the The 6th section has provisions applicable to boroughs Vice-Chancellor did not mean to say that a transas well as counties, and therefore no objection could be fairly urged on that head. I beg, there- feror would not, as a general rule, be liable as a fore, to solicit your valuable aid. contributory for losses incurred while he was a member, but only that, in this case, there was not sufficient proof that there were such losses, and that "the mere possibility that there might have been a loss sustained before he ceased to be a shareholder did not give a right to place his name on the April 5, 1851. I am. &c. Sir, yours, A clerk to borough justices. POOR REMOVALS. TO THE EDITOR OF THE LAW TIMES. SIR,-By the 11 and 12 Vict. c. 31, which is an Act to amend the procedure in the law of removals, power is given by the 8th section for the removing parish to abandon the order of removal by notice, and thereupon the order becomes null and void, upon payment of all costs which the parish to which the pauper was directed to be removed has incurred, power being given for the proper officer to tax such costs without an application to the Court, and whether it be sitting or no. This was, doubtless, a very salutary regulation, and a saving of much expense to parishes, but unfortunately the framers of that Act have not gone far enough, and provided a similar course in cases which occur much more frequently, where an appellant parish gives notice of appeal, the respondent parish accordingly prepares for trial, issues subpoenas, &c. and the notice of appeal is then abandoned. In such cases the respondent parish is compelled to go before the Court, at a great expense, to ask for costs subsequent on the notice of appeal, otherwise the officer cannot tax them. I trust this may have the timely attention of the JUVENIS. JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES' LAW JOURNAL. IN course of constructing a railway, the company obstructed the bed of a navigable river, for which an action was brought against them. They pleaded that it was done by virtue of their special Act and of the Consolidation Acts, which were incorporated therewith; that the part of the river obstructed was among the lands delineated in their plans and sections; that they entered for the purpose of constructing the railway and not otherwise, and that it was necessary to construct the railway in the manner complained of. It was held, that it was not necessary for them either to allege in their plea, or to prove, that they had taken the requisite steps to vest in themselves the soil and bed of the river. It was also held that, PETITIONS, ORDERS, MEETINGS, AP- Cheltenham, Oxford, and London Junction Railway Com tories Nos. 1 and 2 as are not included in classes 4 and 6, and who have neither transferred their shares, nor REAL PROPERTY LAWYER a THE powers of trustees of a charity under ment of the trust were considered in Willes v. master. In Sweeting v. Cowan, 17 Law T. 20, the ploughing up of land stocked with rabbits was held not to be waste, where it had been neither specifically demised as a rabbit warren, nor is such by charter or prescription. TO THE EDITOR OF THE LAW TIMES. SIR,-In the advantages of a general registry of a measure has arisen from their objection to its TO THE EDITOr of the law times. takes place in the office for Registering Acknowledg at all. Lincoln's-inn-fields. REGISTRATION OF DEEDS. TO THE EDITOR OF THE LAW TIMES. SIR,-I observe in your number of the 22nd the tithe-maps universally; but I speak of those I F. STAMPS ON SURRENDERS. As there has been much doubt in the Profession regarding the proper stamp-duty chargeable upon conditional surrenders of copyholds, mortgaged in information a statement, under which I submitted a conjunction with freeholds, I beg to send for your surrender of this description, with a view of ascertaining the Commissioners' opinion upon the point; it was, as you will perceive, stamped with 7s. 6d. be duly stamped. duty under the new, instead of 20s. under the old, Stamp Act, and the Commissioners adjudged it to J. W. K. Walsham-le-Willows, near Ixworth, 8th April, 1851. "The opinion of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue is requested, whether or not the accom panying surrender of copyholds is sufficiently further assurance, or additional or further security, and as such subject to the duty on such instruments imposed by the schedule to the 13 & 14 Vict. c. 97, and therefore not liable to the general duty of 20s. imposed by the 55 Geo. 3, c. 184, on conditional surrenders not therein otherwise charged. "Were it possible upon any construction to hold this instrument subject to the general duty of 20s. a similar conditional surrender of copyhold hereditaments mortgaged in conjunction with freeholds for securing a sum not exceeding 507. (in respect of which the ad valorem stamp under the new Act is 1s. 3d.) would be liable to a duty of 20s. the amount charged on a mortgage for 8001." A WIFE'S REVERSIONARY INTEREST. IN the LAW TIMES of the 5th inst. under the head "Real Property Lawyer and Conveyancer," (p. 16) in alluding to Hobby v. Collins, 17 Law T. 2, you state that his honour the Vice-Chancellor was clearly of opinion that a wife could not deal with land in which she had a reversionary interest.' Now, I read the report of that case in the previous week's LAW TIMES very carefully, and certainly did not arrive at that conclusion. It is, I believe, pretty generally understood now that a married woman cannot deal with personalty in which she has a reversionary interest, but my impression was that she could dispose of any estate or interest in lands, whether in possession, reversion, or remainder, under the Act for the Abolition of Fines and Recoveries. As I understood the case of Hobby v. Collins, as reported, it appeared to have been argued that the married woman could dispose of money to arise from the sale of lands, in which money she had a reversionary interest, and which was subject to be reinvested in the purchase of other lands. In his judgment, the Vice-Choncellor said, "As he understood it, this was a sum charged on lands in which (i. e. in which sum) the wife had a reversionary interest, and he considered that she was unable to deal with it (the money). He must, therefore, refuse the prayer of the petition." But this, as it appears to me, by no means decides that a married woman cannot dispose of her reversionary interest in lands, as the statute for abolishing fines and recoveries expressly enables her to dispose of any estate in any lands, and the grounds on which it was decided that she could not dispose of her reversionary interest in personal estate, viz. that it was a chose in action which could not be reduced into possession, does not apply to real estate. Can you orany of your readers throw any light upon this point, which is one of considerable importance, and refer to any cases deciding directly or indirectly that a married woman cannot dispose of her reversionary interest in lands? A SUBSCRIBER AND READER. [NOTE.-Our correspondent is right. The commentary should have been expressly limited to personalty; the writer's language was too general. Hence the misunderstanding on the part of the reader.-ED. L. T.] Queries on Points of Practice. I WISH one of your correspondents, who so ably J. R. Lands in Waterford; 1,596 acres; profit rent, 9601.:sional, of all grades, and nonprofessional, that I have sold for 13,5007. met with since the "Clerk Advocate" proposition appeared, and I have heard but one solitary voice in I am, Sir, yours, &c. its favour. This estate had been sold for 14,8007. on a former occasion. The Court now ordered that the former purchaser should pay the difference, and the costs of the second sale. Solicitors, Mortimer and Taylor. C. R. G. [NOTE. Our correspondent is mistaken as to the purport of our clauses for professional remuneration. The scale of costs is to be prepared by the judges of the Superior Courts, and bills are to be taxed by the clerks of the County Courts, with an appeal from that taxation to the judge. This was our plan as adopted by Lord Brougham, and accepted by the House of Lords. Nor, as we drew it, was the provision restricted to suits above 201. but extended to all suits in the County Courts. Whether this was in any way altered by the committee we know not, but the newspaper report states that the clause was "agreed to."-ED. L. T.] THE "STATUS" OF ATTORNEYS' CLERKS. SIR,-In justice to a class, neither small nor un important, I trust you will give insertion to a few remarks in reference to a leader in your journal of the 5th inst. touching the appearance of attorneys' clerks representing their principals in the County Courts,-educed, I suppose, by the letter of "C. R. G." in the same number. of Sec. 96 of the County Courts Act protects from seizure in execution the wearing apparel and implements of trade. But, where the landlord gives to the bailiff a written notice, under sec. 107, claiming arrears of rent, the bailiff may distrain such wearing apparel or implements of trade to satisfy Let me remind you that the "advocacy' the rent. (Woodcock v. Pritchard, 17 Law T. 16.) Lord BROUGHAM'S Extension Bill has been attorneys' clerks is recognised and permitted by the terribly hacked by the committee of the Lords. judges of the Superior Courts, at their Chambers; Nothing of importance has escaped, save the clauses by the Taxing-masters of the Courts of Common which we had succeeded in introducing, by which Law, Equity, and Bankruptcy; by the Masters and fairer remuneration is to be secured to the Profes- Registrars in Chancery, the Commissioners in Banksion. But probably this will be esteemed by our ruptcy and Insolvency, and the Magistrates at the readers ample compensation for the temporary loss and barristers; and I have yet to learn that contact with Police Court, having equal audience with solicitors of other promising portions of the Bill, especially such clerks is generally considered as so unpleasant as the Lord Chancellor promises an equity and degrading as yourself and your correspondent jurisdiction to the County Courts as a part of suppose. The highest encomiums upon the ability Chancery reform. Some portions of the eliminated of the clerks, to whom these duties are intrusted, clauses it will be impossible to regret, as the Courts have been from time to time volunteered by the of Reconcilement, the permission to barristers to highest members of the Bench and the Bar; and I practise uninstructed by an attorney, and the ad- cannot but think it savours, not only of exclusivemission of attorneys' clerks as competitors both ness, but of superciliousness, thus to sneer at the with attorneys and barristers. These dangerous character of a class whose merits-although “sernovelties, revolutionising the Profession and destroy-Stephen, in his "Clerk," pays no less flattering a vants"-have been thus recognised. Sir George ing all the distinctions hitherto observed, were, we tribute to the class of men to whom I am now are glad to see, universally condemned. COUNTY COURTS EXTENSION. of this measure, and I venture to call your attention SIR,-Now appears the time to discuss the details to one or two considerations. alluding. For, sir, your supposition that the attorneys would send their "writers" to represent them in the County Courts is as uncomplimentary to the Profession as it is gratuitous and unfounded in fact. I to have forgotten, viz., that there is a body of beg to remind you of another fact, which you appear clerks employed by the Profession of a far higher The most unmitigated evil tendency of making grade than that of copying clerks-a body to whom attorneys' clerks advocates, is, I presume, manifestly the most arduous duties are allotted, the most apparent; but of all the propositions that have ever momentous interests intrusted, and by whom those appeared in County Court legislation this is certainly duties are most efficiently performed, those interests the most dangerous? Better-infinitely better-for adequately protected. It is upon them that the the public, to prohibit any legal assistance what-task of advocacy-if such be the term-along with soever. Is it not obvious, to the plainest capacity, other no less responsible avocations would devolve. that the "clerks" would be the "Sham Lawyers As a body they are skilful, honest, respectable,— of the present. Does any one seek to know the worthy of the trust reposed in them. It is an abeffect? Ask their lordships who attend judges' surdity to suppose that a solicitor would intrust the chambers. Apply to the police magistrates and Old care of his proceedings to an incompetent hand, the Baily authorities. Look to the newspaper reports. consequences of whose ignorance and blunders Ask the poor mechanic and labourer, the ready prey would recoil upon himself, not only in the displeasure of these "Sham Lawyers." Inquire of the poor of his client, and the removal of that client's busiconvicted; and the one universal reply will be, ness, but also in the shape of damages for negligence. "nuisance of nuisances." Surely Lord Brougham As applied to this question, the word "writers," has been deceived, and needs but that the truth then, has no meaning. should be put before him. He professes to value the opinion of the County Court judges. So he ought. Well, then, let him ask them, and legislate accordingly. I notice the clauses 29 and 30 of the proposed Bill; but does the latter effect the intention? It only repeals the fee section of the LAST County Courts Act, and that only related to causes above 201. The 91st section of the 9 & 10 Vict. c. 95, must be touched, or the provision will only go half way towards the remedy at which you evidently aim. But while on this question, ought not that gross bungle of words-the 91st section-to be entirely repealed, and a fresh clause, giving professional men absolute and not permissive right (as now) to be heard? The power proposed to the County Court judges to frame costs should be extended to the County Court clerks. The judges alone are certainly not competent to do justice between the public and attorney. I only notice details here-leaving such erratic notions as courts of reconcilement" to the public at large. But, upon the above questions, on which I consider I am enabled to inform an opinion, I respectfully and earnestly advise you, that ever since most important journal, subjects of greater importyou have occupied the post of editor of a now ance to the Profession have never been discussed in the LAW TIMES, or which deserved more instant and earnest attention, and the exercise of that influence which your position has commanded for you. The possibility that a certain class of attorneys could, in collusion with some protean, "clever shamlawyer," who should enact alternately the part of a clerk to each-"divide the spoil," could be easily guarded against by the vigilance of the judge or In addition to this, the the clerk of the court. announcements in the daily papers set out what I should conceive to be a sufficient precaution, in the necessity for the clerk having been six months in the employ of the solicitor he represents. I will not further intrude upon your space in urging those grounds which make the arrangement in question convenient, nay more, expedient. In this respect, for the present at least, I will follow the example of your correspondent "C. R. G."-more laconic than logical, in assuming that reasons and instances are needless." I am, Sir, yours, &c. New Broad-street, April 7, 1851. THE LAWYER. J. B. M. Summary. EQUITY PRACTICE.-Where a party opposed ducted his opposition that the authorities were in person a motion for a receiver, and so connot cited, and thus, through his own neglect, the case was not fully discussed, his costs in the Court below were not allowed, upon his succeeding on appeal against the order. (Hall v. Hall, 17 Law T. 11.) A point of practice under Turner's Act was decided in Stapleton v. Stapleton, 17 Law T. 15, namely, that the signature of counsel to the draft of a special case, according to sec. 10 of that Act, is sufficient.] In Waldron v. Sloper, 17 Law T. 15, a claim, improperly certified to be a short claim, was ordered to be restored to its place in the general paper, it appearing, when it came on, to be a cause that would take time, and the party who had set it down as a short cause was ordered to pay the costs of the day. An interesting question as to costs under the Law of Patents was decided in Newhall v. Wilkins, 17 Law T. 20, which was an action for infringement of a patent. A verdict passed for the plaintiff, who thereupon claimed treble costs under the statute, the patent having been affirmed at a former trial. It was held, that the proper course was to prove this by producing the record of the former trial after, and not before, the verdict. COUNSEL. TO THE EDITOR OF THE LAW TIMES. SIR,-Can you inform me, as well as others who are anxious to know whether there is any rule in any court or on any circuit which requires that a plaintiff's case must be conducted by two counsel at least? LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY CHANGES IN view of making it the foundation of dissolution, or than two-thirds of the accommodation shall be sub- a SCOTLAND.-Mr. Rutherfurd has accepted the vacant seat on the bench, and the Solicitor-General, Mr. Moncreiff, succeeds him as Lord Advocate. This, of course, creates a vacancy in the parliamentary representation of the Leith district of burghs; and the new Lord Advocate has presented himself to the constituency. In Mr. Rutherfurd the bench has gained one of the greatest lawyers Scotland ever produced, but the crown and the country have lost valuable public officer. a FARM BUILDINGS.-A Bill has been brought in by Mr. Cochrane and Mr. Forbes to extend the provisions of "The Drainage of Lands Act, 1849," to the advance of private money for the erection and repair of farm buildings on lands in Great Britain and Ireland. It proposes to give landlords the Reimer v. Ringrove, 17 Law T. 18, was a ques-power to borrow money for this purpose, provided tion on the law of Marine Insurance; what is a always that the sum borrowed or advanced under the constructive total loss? A cargo of corn, consigned Act does not exceed in amount eighteen months' to persons at Hull, was insured for the voyage. value of the land in respect of which it is borrowed, The vessel was stranded on the coast of Norway, Every rent charge to be granted in respect of money and the corn sold there as damaged. A claim was thus borrowed may be made payable for any period The exceeding twenty-two years, but not exceeding thirty made upon the policy as for a total loss. All buildings erected or improved under the judge directed the jury that if, with proper and years. to Hull in the state of corn, though damaged, it Butler Cole bequeathed to Mr. Dixon, surgeon, of RENUNCIATION OF A LEGACY.-The late Mrs. reasonable care, the corn could have been brought Act must be insured against fire. would not be a total loss, and such direction was Preston, her medical attendant, the sum of 3,000. held to be right. It was also held, that if the ex- That gentleman has, it is said, declined to receive pense of conveying the corn to Hull would have the legacy, and has executed a deed of renunciation. been greater than its value when brought, it would This sum will be divided among the nephews and amount to a total loss. nieces of the deceased lady.-Blackburn Standard. My position at the late assizes of the county of A. was this: I was plaintiff's attorney in an action for and I delivered my brief to Mr. B. On the conference, about 801. a short case with only two witnesses, he alluded to his having no junior; I said I did not intend him to have any assistance, as the case was so simple, nor did I know of any rule requiring two counsel unless the leader was a silk-gownsman. He admitted that the character of the case did not require that he should have any help, but he feared the rule on that circuit would compel him to ask for a junior; so I borrowed his brief to make a copy. During the day (the first day of the assizes), the plaintiff's and defendant's counsel referred the case to a barrister (it is not my purpose to enter into this circumstance now), and on returning me the brief, my counsel said, "Did you give a brief to a junior?" and I replied "No, and I am glad I have saved the fee, as this is the upshot of the case." But, he said, I was liable to the Bankrupt Laws were decided in Stansbound to deliver another brief even then; so I in-field v. Layton, 17 Law T. 20. Where a farmer dorsed a sheet of paper and handed it to Mr. C. had a room in his house for selling flour and pork, whose labour in behalf of my client was to put his and there was a continuing buying and selling, name under the fee, and return me the brief, with I am, Sir, yours, &c. thanks. A MEMBER OF THE LAW SOCIETY AT April 7, 1851. P.S.-I may as well mention that the next day the arbitration was entered upon and closed, and the certificate (or award) handed to me on payment of ten guineas. [Note.-There is no obligation to employ two counsel, unless the senior be a Q.C., in which case he must have a junior.-ED. L. T.] THE MERCANTILE LAWYER. Summary. In Silverlock v. Irvin, 17 Law T. 20, declarations made by the plaintiff at the time of supplying goods and entries in his shop-books were held to be admissible for him to prove that he then knew of the existence of a dormant partner in the business for which the goods were supplied, and that he was relying on his credit. The circumstances that make a farmer a trader PROCEEDINGS OF LAW SOCIETIES. LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY. Tuesday, April 15, 1851. 44. Was the evidence of handwriting tendered in the case of Doe dem. Mudd v. Suckamore, 5 Ad, & Ell. 703, properly rejected? XXXII. Is a similar Act to the Irish Incumbered Estates Act desirable for England? CORRESPONDENCE. AGENTS AND ACCOUNTANTS. TO THE EDITOR OF THE LAW TIMES. SIR, I have read with satisfaction the letters and correspondence of Mr. F. Charsley in your journal of the 8th ult. upon the subject of unqualified persons acting as conveyancers; and it must be a to find that there are amongst its numbers gentlemen who are at last becoming awake to its interests, and are determined to discountenance that class of accountants, &c. who have grown like excrescences interlopers under the names of agents, stewards, upon the legal body, and render the law scarcely worth the pursuit. The Circuits. NORFOLK CIRCUIT. BURY ST. EDMUNDS, April 2.-The Assizes for the county of Suffolk commenced yesterday after-matter of congratulation to the Profession at large noon, when the commission was opened by both the learned judges, who afterwards attended divine service. This morning both the Courts were opened at THE Court of Chancery has refused, in Hall v. the same features which we noticed in those of its ten o'clock. The cause list for this county presents Hall, 17 Law T. 11, on appointing a receiver and predecessors on this circuit. This county produces manager, to take into its hands, for the purpose of only five causes. One was withdrawn, one was a continuing it, a partnership trade, "The general writ of inquiry simply, a third was an undefended principle," said the Lord Chancellor, resulting action of ejectment, the fourth was a paltry action of from all the authorities appears to be that the trespass, which terminated in a verdict for 15s. only. breaches of the articles of partnership are not All of these were disposed of long before twelve necessarily the foundation of a dissolution; but o'clock, and the only remaining cause is a tythe when those breaches are of such a nature as to case, which being appointed to be heard before a shew that the partnership cannot be carried on for special jury, will be tried to-morrow morning. The the benefit of the parties, according to the original crime. It contains the names of 92 prisoners, and calendar, however, presents a fearful array of intention as apparent from the articles, inasmuch as among the crimes imputed to them are to be found one side has put an end to the partnership accord- no fewer than 5 cases of wilful murder, 8 of arson, 2 ing to the original agreement and articles, in that of forgery, 4 of robbery, 2 of perjury, 3 of burglary, case the other party may be relieved from the part-3 of wounding, 2 of manslaughter, and a variety of nership, although there is no express provision that minor offences, including the Barham rioters. the partnership should determine upon the breach of either of those articles or of any others. It is, therefore, upon the ground that virtually the parties have determined the partnership, or, at least, that one has, so far as he is concerned, withdrawn himself from the partnership according to the articles, and that the other, by reason of such conduct, claims to be relieved or prays a dissolution; and, therefore, in every case where complaints are made of breaches of the articles, it must be seen with what view the complaint is urged, whether with the One of the great evils to be complained of is the practice which exists among agents and stewards of estates of noblemen and gentlemen preparing all the leases and other instruments, which are strictly the province of their solicitor to do. This, which is the only real remuneration a solicitor generally has for his legal advice in family matters, is taken from the instrument, except from old forms in their pos him by men who are quite incompetent to prepare session, and who cannot adapt new circumstances when requisite, and that in violation of an Act of Parliament, which I am certain the owners of those estates would not countenance or allow, if they were aware that such a violation of the law was committed; nor would the bailiffs or land-agents themselves be comfortable under the penalty of 501. if fairly brought before them. CHURCH BUILDING ACTS AMENDMENT.-Yesterday Lord Carlisle's Bill (now in the House of Lords), to amend the Church Building Acts, was Professional delicacy prevents the respectable printed. It contains thirty-four clauses, and was practitioner from explaining this to his client; and things, it provides that the commissioners for build- counties of Lancashire and Shropshire, I hope you not explained when introduced. Among other as I am concerned for several large estates in the ing new churches may, by order under seal, fix a will excuse my withholding my name. moderate rental on a certain number of free seats in a church where they have before established pew April 5, 1851. rents, and on the vacancy of the incumbency may revoke such order. It is proposed that not more ETC. PROMOTIONS, APPOINTMENTS, Friday Saturday [Clerks of the Peace for Counties, Cities, and Boroughs Monday. will oblige by regularly forwarding the names and ad- Tuesday. dresses of all new Magistrates who may qualify.] The Queen has been pleased to grant the place of one of the Lords of Session in Scotland to Andrew Rutherfurd, esq. her Majesty's Advocate for Scotland, in the room of Sir James Wellwood Moncrieff, bart. deceased. Wednesday Friday MEMBERS RETURNED TO SERVE IN THIS BOROUGH OF DEVONPORT.-Sir John Romilly, knt. Master or Keeper of the Rolls and Records in Her Majesty's High Court of Chancery. TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON.-Sir Alexander James Edmund Cockburn, of Wackehurst-place, in the county of Sussex, knt. her Majesty's AttorneyGeneral. CITY OF OXFORD.-William Page Wood, esq. her Majesty's Solicitor-General. CITY OF COVENTRY.-Charles Geach, of Birmingham, in the county of Warwick, esq. in the room of George James Turner, esq. who has accepted the office of Vice-Chancellor. COUNTY OF SOMERSET, Western Division.-William Henry Powell Gore Langton, of the parish of Newton Saint Loe, in the said county, esq. in the room of Sir Alexander Hood, bart. deceased. Saturday Monday. Tuesday. 2 { Pleas, Demurrers, Exceptions, and Further Directions 3-Petitions Vice-Chancellor Lord Cranworth's Tuesday... April 15-Motions ......23-Causes and Claims ..25-Petition day. Petitions Friday 26 { Pleas, Demurrers, Exceptions, and Further Directions .28-Causes and Claims 29-Short Causes, Short Claims, and do. 1-Motions 2-Petition day. Petitions 3{Pleas, Demurrers, Exceptions, and Further Directions 5-Causes and Claims 6-Short Causes. Short Claims, and do. 8-Motions Saturday Monday. Tuesday. Wednesday Thursday Friday 9-Petition day. Petitions { Pleas, Demurrers, Exceptions, and .12-Causes and Claims .13-Motions. Lord Campbell. Sievewright v. Archibald Tried during Hilary_Term, 1851. SPECIAL CASES AND DEMURRERS. Sharpe and Co.-Tarleton v. Liddell and Another, special .....16 Petition day. Petitions, Causes, and Sewell and 6.-Ellcott v. Lewis, special case, Claims Causes and Claims .24-Motions and ditto Unopposed Petitions, Short Causes, .25{Short Claims, and Causes & Claims' .28 Causes and Claims Wednesday Thursday Wednesday Thursday Friday .17 Saturday .26 Wednesday .23 Monday.. .28 Tuesday.. Appeals .29 Friday Wednesday .30 Thursday...May 1-Appeal Motions Monday. Petition day. Lunatic Petitions, un- Tuesday.. Saturday...Mar. 3 Monday Tuesday.. Appeals Wednesday Thursday 8-Appeal Motions .....30 {Pleas, Demurrers, Exceptions, Further Wednesday Petition day. Lunatic Petitions, un- Monday. .13-Appeal Motions. 2 { Unopposed Petitions. Short Causes, Friday .12 9 Short Claims, and Causes & Claims {Unopposed. Petitions Short Cases, { Court of Queen's Bench. Sittings appointed to be held in Middlesex and London, MIDDLESEX.-IN TERM. First sitting-Thursday, April 24, and following days, at eleven o'clock, for short defended and undefended causes. at eleven o'clock, for short defended and undefended Second sitting-Monday, April 28, and following days, causes. Third sitting-Saturday, May 10, at half-past nine AFTER TERM. Wednesday, May 14, at half-past nine o'clock. LONDON.IN TERM. Sitting Monday, May 12, at ten o'clock, for short defended AFTER TERM. Thursday, May 15, to adjourn only. N.B. The hours of attendance at the Marshal's office of this court will in future be from eleven till five during Term and sittings, and from eleven to two during the rest of the year. CROWN PAPER. Middlesex-The Attorney-General v. The Great Western Lancashire-Reg. v. The Lancashire and Yorkshire Rail- Pringle.-Smith and Another v. Losh and Others, award Smythe.-Morice, clerk, executor, &c. v. Clarke, executor, Brigge and Son.-Weddell v. Robinson, special case B. Turner.-Lowndes v. Earl Stamford and Warrington, dem. Pemberton and Co.-Lord Seymour v. Morrell, special case Brackenridge.-Blair, administrator, &c. of Buckley, c. Ormond and Another, executors, &c. special case Tatham and Co.-Baker v. Shadbolt, dem. to plaintiff's declaration Same.-Same v. Same, dem. to defendant's plea Abbott and Co.-Watkins v. The Great Northern Railway Lowndes.-Shrimpton v. Young, sued with others, dem. Philpot.-Cooke v. Cunliffe, bart. and Another, special Cattlin.-Rains v. Woolrych, secretary of the Metropolitan Wheelock.-Valpy and Another, assignees, &c. v. Oakley, Young. The Irish South-Eastern Railway Company . Mehew v. Bone. Order of Nisi Prius. continued to attend the police-court daily up to Clay and Others v. Rufford and Others. Order of V. C. Friday last, when he had a long sitting. The same Wigram. Cannan and Others, assignees, v. The South Eastern Rail-night he was seized with gout in the stomach. After Dickinson and Another . The Grand Junction Canal DEMURRER FOR ARGUMENT. Fairless and Others v. The York, Newcastle, and Berwick Key v. Thimbley Bank of Australasia v. Fraser Stocks and Others v. Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of Lancaster v. Eastern Union Railway Company NEW TRIAL PAPER. Lafond and Another v. Ellis, 2nd May, 1850 North Western Railway Company v. M'Michael, 10th and DABBS.-On the 6th inst. the wife of John Dabbs, esq. 11th February, 1851 Embrey and Another v. Owen, 11th February, 1851 SPECIAL CASES. O'Brien v. Lord Kenyon and Others, 13th Nov. 1850 DEMURRERS. solicitor, Stamford, of a daughter. HARRISON. On the 30th ult. at Sutherland-place, Bayswater, the lady of Edward M. Harrison, esq. barristerat-law, of a son. SLOPER. On the 9th inst. at 7, Southwick-place, Hydepark, Mrs. Lindsay Sloper, of a son. MARRIAGE. Allhusen v. Priest and Others (sued with another), 20th MOORE, Thomas, esq. assistant-surgeon 5th regt. of in Nov. 1850 Robinson and Uxor v. Marquis of Bristol and Others. In Ellen v. Topp, 26th April, 1850, and 20th Jan. 1851 quare impedit Rawley and Another v. Kent Rooper v. Loftus. Tuesday, April 29; Friday, May 2; and Tuesday, May 6. Court of Exchequer. Sittings at Nisi Prius in Middlesex and London, before the IN TERM.-MIDDLESEX. 1st sitting, Wednesday, April 16, for undefended causes AFTER TERM. Wednesday, May 14. IN TERM.-LONDON. 1st sitting, Monday, April 28. AFTER TERM. Thursday, May 15, to adjourn only. The Court will not sit at Nisi Prius from Thursday, 17th April, to Tuesday, 22nd April, both days inclusive. The Court will sit during and after Term at ten o'clock. NEW TRIAL PAPER. fantry, Scindia's Contingent, to Louisa Cort, youngest daughter of the late Coningsby Cort, esq. solicitor, London, on 3rd Feb. at Lullut pore. DEATHS. ADAMS, Mary, third surviving daughter of the late John EDWARDS, Jane, relict of the late Rev. Vincent Edwards, LANSDOWNE, Marchioness of, on the 3rd inst. at Bowood. JOURNAL OF PROPERTY. MONEY MARKET. SITTINGS PAPER. Banc. after Motions Tuesday April 15 Peremptory Paper Wednesday... 16 Motions and Per- Midd. 1st sitting. emptory Paper Trial Paper. Thursday. 17 Motions and New ...... 25 Special Cases and Demurrers. 26 Motions and New Trial Paper. Lush London.-Lord Chief Baron. Great Western Railway " Lord Chief Baron. Grapes v. Bunney. Keating Lord Chief Baron. Weare and Another v. Lord Chief Baron. Morgan v. Whitmore and Others. Watson Mr. Baron Platt. Burmester, P.O. &c. v. Norris, Graham and Others, assignees, Moved after the Fourth Day of Hilary Term, 1851. Another. E. James 28 Demurrers and Spe- London 1st sitting cial Cases. Tuesday 29 Errors, Motions and Midd. 2nd sitting New Trial Paper. Wednesday... 30 Special Cases Demurrers. and 5 Special Cases and London 2nd sitting 6 Motions and New Midd. 3rd sitting Wednesday... 7 Demurrers and Spe cial Cases. THE GAZETTES. OF LEGISLATORS, MAGISTRATES, AND LAWYERS. HILL, JAMES, linendraper, Holcombe Rogus, Devonshire, MR. RUSHTON. It is with feelings of the profoundest regret that we announce the death of Mr. Edward Rushton, the stipendiary magistrate for this borough. This melancholy event, the result of a short but severe illness, took place at his residence, Parkside-house, this morning, at half-past seven o'clock. The death of this gentleman, who was so well known and so highly respected by all persons in the town, must be looked upon as a loss to the whole community; Amid the extended circle of his more intimate and private friends the sad event is one which will excite feelings of the deepest emotion and sorrow. The name of Rushton is historic in the town of Liverpool, and has ever been associated with all that is elevating in its tendencies, noble in its aims, and liberal in its action. The deceased was in the 57th year of his age. He was appointed stipendiary magistrate of Liverpool on the 16th of May, 1839. He discharged his onerous, delicate, and difficult of duties with such firmness and impartiality as to secure the approbation and confidence of his brother jus,ices and the general body of the people, as well as to call forth the unqualified commendation of the judges of the land. On Monday week Mr. Rushton had a slight attack of gout in the left foot, but he Doe dem. Pottow and Another v. Tucker and Another. Doe dem. Patrick and Others v. Duke of Beaufort. Special The Vauxhall Bridge Company v. Sawyer. Order Simpson v. Earl of Carlisle. Order of Nisi Prius. NEW CASES ENTERED FOR EASTER TERM. April 16 and May 12, at one, Exeter. Off. as. Herna man. Sol. Force, Exeter. Petition, April 4. HOBSON, JAMES THOMAS, corn merchant, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, April 19, at eleven, May 29, at twelve, Basinghall-st. Off. as. Nicholson. Sols. Law. rence and Co. Old Jewry-chambers. Petition, April 5. JONES, GEORGE FREDERICK, surgeon, East Ilsley, Berkshire, April 15, at eleven, May 20, at twelve, Basinghall. st. Off. as. Groom. Sols. Baylis and Drewe, Redcrossst. Petition, March 29. M'LEAN, JOHN, commission merchant, Liverpool, April 17 and May 22, at eleven, Liverpool. Off. as. Bird. Sols. Littledale and Bardswell, Liverpool. Petition, April 3. PRACH, ROBERT, butcher, Thorney, Cambridgeshire, April 17 and May 15, at one, Basinghall-st. Off. as. Bell. Sol. Robinson, South-square, Gray's-inn. Petition, April 7. ROBINSON, WILLIAM, corn factor, Ovington-square, Brompton, and Trinity-square, Tower-hill, City, April 19, at twelve, and May 29, at eleven, Basinghall-st. Off. as. Pennell. Sol. Bennett, Furnival's-inn. Petition, April 2. SMELLIE, GEORGE, silversmith, High-st. Shadwell, April 17 and May 15, at two, Basinghall-st. Off. as. Bell. Sols. Taylor and Collinson, Great James-st. Bedford-row. Petition, March 10. STOCKRIDGE, GEORGE, draper, Oxford-st. April 15, at Gazette, April 11. |