Page images
PDF
EPUB

shows that the receipts were £472,060 17s. 4d., and amongst these were the following items: Renewing fines, £2199 9s. 11d., judloiary fees, &o., viz., Mansion-house, £822 12s. 11d.; Guildhall, 2877 23. 11d.; reimburse. ment on account of criminal prosecutions, £1390 8s. 8d.; reimbursement on account of office of coroner, £1200; Mayor's Court fees (gross) (the expenses charged under the head of civil government), £9072 4s. 7d.; expenses of Bills in Parliament, Remembrancer's office suspense account, £4166 193. 2d. The expenditure included charges on the corporation estates, viz., cost of collection and management, £9310 14s. 11d.; rentcharges, taxes, rates, bequests, and other obligatory charges, £19,609 16s. 1d.; expenses cf magistracy, £8661 48. 4d.; police expenses, (City's proportion), &c., £26,947 14s. 3d.; expenses of administration of justice (criminal), £7150 13s. 6d.; expenses of office of coroner (gross) £2844 78. 8d.; expenses of civil government, including Lord Mayor, sheriffs, judges, and officers of the Mayor's Court, expenses of Mansionhouse, Guildhall, £60,765 15s.; Bills in Parliament, £1177 18. 4d.; construction of new offices for Mayor's Court, £2331 1s. 10d.

The court at Shanghai in which a Chinese magistrate, with a foreign consular official as assessor, tries all cases from the Shanghai foreign settlement in which Chinese are defendants, is one of the most curious tribunals in the world. It is formed by a convention between China and the Powers. Its working is made the subject of a special annual report by the officer who sits in it as British assessor, and from the report of Mr. Carles, the official referred to, which has lately been issued, the career of the tribunal during last year was not devoid of interest. One fruitful source of litigation is that Chinese are usually known to foreigners by a business name which is not their own, which they have no authority to sign, and which may be that of their father, brother, cousin, or even of an utter stranger. The number of criminal cases dealt with at the court during the year was over 5000, and Mr. Carles gives a curious picture of the difficulty of the magistrate's position. Practically he has no code of law to guide him. The Chinese code is virtually a dead letter in his court, for the foreign assessors would one and all protest against the enforcement of the punishments provided by the Penal Code. The punishment of imprisonment for fixed terms has been introduced in their stead, but without having been properly legalised. Each assessor may have different views as to the length of imprisonment called for by the offence.

At the Thames Police-court, three of the overseers of the parish of Whitechapel were summoned before Mr. Dickenson for having "unlawfully, wickedly, falsely, and maliciously conspired and combined, confederated, and agreed together to wrongfully deprive Stanley Mockett of his right and privilege to have his name inserted in the list of persons entitled to be registered as parliamentary voters for the Whitechapel Division of the borough of the Tower Hamlets, and for having wickedly combined to insert in the said list certain names as the names of persons qualified to vote who to their knowledge had no right or qualification to have their name inserted." It was alleged that the name had been omitted in order to prevent the applicant, who was the local agent of one of the political associations of the district, from being objector to names on the register. It was submitted before witnesses were called that the charge could not be laid against the overseers at the present stage. In order to establish this charge of conspiracy it must be shown that Mr. Stanley Mockett had been deprived of some right In about ten days' time the case would come before the revising barrister in the usual manner, and it would be for that gentleman to deal with it. At the present moment they did not know whether Mr. Stanley Mockett had the right to be on the list; and it would be for the revising barrister to determine the point. Mr. Dickenson supposed the overseers had prima facie a right to insert or erase any name; and that it would be for the revising barrister to say whether they had done right or wrong. If that was the case, he considered it would be a question of bona fides, and he therefore adjourned the case.

Mr. Walworth H. Roberts, the barrister appointed to revise the parliamentary registers and lists of county electors for the Ealing Division of the county of Middlesex, will hold his court at Westminster on the 15th Sept. Mr. William F. Webster will hold his court for the Hornsey Division of the county of Middlesex at Highgate on the 17th Sept., at Islington on the 20th Sept., and at the Guildhall on the 22nd Sept. Mr. Frederick Mackarness will hold his court for the Harrow and Tottenham Division of the county of Middlesex at Bethnal-green on the 16th, 17th, 18th, and 19th Sept., and at Hampstead on the 25th and 26th Sept. Mr. Lister Drummond, the barrister appointed to revise the parliamentary and county council lists of electors for Battersea and Clapham, will hold his court on the 22nd and 23rd Sept. for the Battersea Division, and on the 24th and 25th Sept. for the Clapham Division. There will be evening sittings of the court on each day. Mr. Algernon Bathurst will again revise the list for the Strand, St. George's (Hanover-square), and Westminster Divisions of the City of Westminster, beginning at the Vestry Hall, Piccadilly, on the 9th Sept. He will hold his court for the St. George's, Hanover-square, Division on the 15th and 16th Sept., with an evening sitting on the 16th. Mr. Lionel L. Shadwell will revise the lists for St. Pancras as follows: The South Division on the 22nd Sept., the East Division on the 23rd Sept, the North Division on the 24th Sept., and the West Division on the 25th Sept., with evening sittings on each day. Mr. Frederic Mackarness will hold his court for the revision of the parliamentary and county electors lists for the borough of Fulham on Sept. 30, Oct. 1, 2, and 3, with an evening sitting on the last named day.

At the annual licensing meeting for the Kingsclere Division of Hampshire, the justices pursued a course which has aroused considerable excitement among the brewers and licensed victuallers in that part of the country. The presiding magistrate was Mr. Melville Portal, for many years chairman of the Hampshire Quarter Sessions. The justices instituted careful inquiries as to the number of public-houses and beerhouses in each parish and the distances between them, and made calculations as to the proportion they bore to the population, with the result that they deferred the renewal of licences in five or six parishes for consideration after the other business had been disposed of. After deliberating in private for more than an hour, Mr. Portal said the justices had taken special pains about the matter on several grounds. There had been a recent decision on the licensing question by the High Court of Justice, in which it had been laid down very strongly that the duties of justices as regards this matter were greater than had been supposed in late years, and the Cou:t of Quarter Sessions had drawn the justices' attention to a fact which had been freely remarked upon in both Houses of Parliament, and indeed throughout the country, namely, the excess of licensed houses over the needs of the population. The Court of Quarter Sessions in that county had called the justices' attention to the subject, and urged them

to ascertain what could be done in the way of equalising the number of licensed houses with the actual wants of the people. The justices had found that in the Kingsolere Division the excess was very great, and in five or six parishes, where the excess was specially striking, they had decided to defer the renewal of licences for a month, to give the owners an opportunity of attending, as it was perfectly clear that the number. of licensed houses must be reduced. It must not be inferred that all the licences granted that day would be renewed on a future occasion, as such was not likely to be the case.

BANKRUPTCY LAW AND PRACTICE. ASSIGNMENT BY DEBTOR OF HIS PROPERTY— ACT OF BANKRUPTCY.

We discussed in these columns on the 19th April last the somewhat important case of Re Spackman (62 L. T. Rep. N. S. 266), decided by Justices Cave and Smith, in which their Lordships refused to extend the rule laid down in Re Sinclair; Ex parte Payne (53 L. T. Rep. N. S. 767) that a money payment made by a debtor bona fide to his solicitors to defray costs incurred in opposing bankruptcy proceedings which have been commenced against him cannot be recovered from the solicitors on bankruptcy ensuing. The case has now been before the Court of Appeal, and the Master of the Rolls and Lords Justices Fry and Lopes have, without in reality expressing any opinion on the question which was decided in the court below, reversed the judgment on another ground altogether. In order to understand the judgment in the Court of Appeal it will be necessary to remind our readers of the facts of the case. In Nov. 1886 the debtor got into difficulties, his property consisting chiefly of certain furniture and effects at Swindon and of books and office furniture at Bradford-on-Avon. He had instructed an auctioneer at Swindon to sell his property at Swindon, which authority was of course revocable. That being the state of things, the creditors becoming aware of his inten. tion to sell his Swindon property, the London agents of Mr. Jones, the solicitor acting for some creditors, had an interview with Messrs. May and Co., the debtor's solicitors, at which he intimated that, unless an undertaking was given that the proceeds of the sale should be set aside for the benefit of the creditors, he would take proceedings in bankruptcy against the debtor. That interview took place on the 20th Nov., and on the 22nd Nov. the debtor saw Messrs. May and Co., and an arrangement, as appears from their letter of that date, was come to that the proceeds of the sale of substantially the whole of his property should be paid into a bank to the credit of certain persons as trustees for the creditors. On the same day authority was given by the debtor to the auctioneer to pay the proceeds of the sale of his property at Swindon into the bank to the credit of those persons as trustees for the creditors. The effect of this was probably to render the authority to sell given to Redway, the auctioneer, irrevocable. The sale of the property at Swindon took place on the next day (the 23rd Nov.) and the proceeds of the sale were paid into the bank in accordance with the arrangement. It is clear that on the 22nd or 23rd Nov. Messrs. May and Co. had notice of the transaction, because it was arranged by them. On the 14th Dec. a receiving order was made against Spackman, the act of bankruptcy alleged being an assignment of all his property for the benefit of his creditors generally. Spackman was adjudicated bankrupt. It seems that on the 9th Nov. Spackman had given to the appellants his solicitors an authority to sell at Tattersall's certain horses and carriages, and retain the purchase money for him, and to charge such horses, &c., or the purchase money, with the costs and expenses being incurred by me with your firm." The judge of the Bristol County Court, having come to the conclusion that there had been an act of bankruptcy committed, of which Messrs. May, Sykes, and Batten had notice, they were not entitled to retain any of the proceeds of sale of the horses for costs incurred after the 22nd Nov., the date at which they had notice of the act of bankruptcy. This decision was affirmed by Cave and Smith, JJ., for the reasons stated in their judgment (62 L. T. Rep. N. S. 266). The sole question which was in reality discussed by the Court of Appeal was whether or not the arrangement come to on the 22nd Nov. was or was not an assignment of the debtor's property within sect. 4, sub-sect. 1 (a), of the Act of 1883, so as to amount to an act of bankruptcy. The section says, "A debtor commits an act of bankruptcy in each of the following cases: (a) If in England or elsewhere he makes a conveyance or assignment of his property to a trustee or trustees for the benefit of his creditors generally; (b) If in England or elsewhere he makes a fraudulent conveyance, gift, delivery, or transfer of his property, or, any part thereof." Now, if these two decisions of sub-sect. I be looked at, it will be found that there is a very great distinction between them. Sub-sect. (a) is confined to conveyances or assignments, and the conveyance or assignment must be "of his property," clearly all his property. Sub-sect. (b) speaks of (1) fraudulent conveyance, gift, delivery, or transfer; (2) the fraudulent conveyance, &c., may be of all his property or any part thereof. It seems clear then, looking at the two sub-sections, that a conveyance or assignment of part of the debtor's property without fraud is not sufficient to constitute an act of bankruptcy, while, if that conveyance, &c., of part of the property is fraudulent, it is sufficient. On the other hand, a delivery or transfer of the whole of the debtor's property, if it do not amount to a formal conveyance or assignment, will not be an act of bankruptcy unless it is fraudulent, in which case sub-sect. (b) will cover it. In other words, the transactions referred to in sub-sect. 1 (a) are formal conveyances or assignments of the whole of a debtor's property without any evidence of fraudulent intent, while sub-sect. (b) applies to various other dispositions of his property which may be made by a debtor, such as gift, delivery, &c.; but then it provides that these must, in order to be acts of bankruptcy, be fraudulent. This being then the distinction between the two divisions of sub-sect.(1), let us see what was the nature of the transaction relied on in this ease. In the words of the Master of the Rolls, "The substance of the trans

[ocr errors]

action is alleged to be that the bankrupt agreed that certain persons should take control of his property, should have the whole, or substan. tially the whole, of it sold, and that the proceeds of sale should be paid into a bank in the names of certain persons in order that the money might be distributed among his creditors." Assuming, then, that this agreement was made at the instance of the creditors, and that it was an agreement that substantially the whole of the debtor's property should be realised, and the proceeds distributed among his creditors, the question is, whether the transaction was an act of bankruptcy." Now, there was no fraudulent intent in this case; so that the transaction must, if at all, come within the provisions of sub-sect. 1 (a). In order, then, to understand the meaning of that sub-sect. 1 (a) it will be as well to look at the earlier Bankruptcy Acts. The earlier bankruptcy statutes confined dispositions of property to grants and conveyances, and therefore a deed was held necessary in all cases to make a disposition of property, whether real or personal, an act of bankruptcy. Thus the words obtained a well-known meaning, i.e., a grant or conveyance by deed. In the Act of 1869 the words " conveyance or assignment are used, so that certainly after 1869 the word "assignment" also had obtained a well-known meaning in bankruptcy law; that is, an assignment by deed to a trustee for the benefit of creditors. The meaning, then, must be that, in order to bring a transaction within sub-sect. 1 (a), it must be carried out by deed. It was said on behalf of the trustee that if you confine the provisions of sect. 4, sub-sect. 1 (a) to formal transactions which require a deed in all cases you will encourage debtors to transfer the control of all their property to third persons for the benefit of creditors without a deed, and so enable them to evade the Act altogether. If such a state of things should come about the answer must be, that the Bankruptcy Act was made for man, and not man for the Bankruptcy Act. Whatever, then, was the nature of this transaction, whether it was an assignment, a trust, or anything else, it did not come within sub-sect. 1 (a), as it lacked the one essential feature held to be necessary; e.g. it was not by deed. Under these circumstances there was no act of bankruptcy at all, and the decision of the County Court judge on that point (which was really never gone into properly before the Divisional Court) was wrong. This result leaves untouched the question which Justices Cave and Smith had before them, namely, the position the solicitors occupied under the charge given them on the 9th Nov. by the debtor, assuming there was an act of bankruptcy on the 22nd Nov. of which they had notice. It is true Lord Justice Lopes gives it as his opinion that this case is not within the decision of Re Sinclair ; but then he refuses to go into the question whether or not Re Sinclair was right or wrong. We are glad to think that the solicitors will after all get their money, which after the decision in the court below seemed at least uncertain, at any rate to those who were not aware that sub-sect. 1 (a) required transactions in order to come within its grasp to be carried out by means of a deed.

COUNTY COURTS.

SITTINGS OF THE COURTS.

FOR THE WEEK ENDING SATURDAY, SEPT. 13.

Ashton-under-Lyne, Thursday
Barrow-in-Furness, Wednesday, at 9.45
Birmingham, Tuesday and Wednesday,
at 10

Bolton, Wednesday, at 9.30

Congleton,* Tuesday

Exeter, Tuesday,

Thursday

Wednesday

and

Great Grimsby, Thursday, at 10; Friday

(B. & A.), at 10

Hadleigh, Saturday

Haverhill, Saturday, at 9.30

Hertford, Wednesday, at 11

Hitchin, Monday, at 10

Hyde,* Wednesday

Kendal, Monday, at 12

Lincoln, Monday, at 10

Louth, Tuesday, at 10.30

Mildenhall, Wednesday
Newmarket, Friday, at 10
Newton Abbot, Friday and Saturday
Oldham, Thursday, at 9; before Registrar
(Bankruptcy), Friday, at 11
Oundle, Wednesday, at 10
Peterborough, Tuesday, at 10,
Rochdale, Friday, at 9

Romford, Friday, at 11

Saxmundham, Friday
Spilsby, Wednesday, at 12
Stockport,* Friday
Thrapstone, Thursday, at 10
Ulverston, Tuesday, at 10
Whitehaven, Thursday, at 9
Wigan, Tuesday, at 10
Workington, Friday, at 9.

* Other sittings are specially fixed if necessary.

ALFRETON COUNTY COURT.
Wednesday, July 2.

(Before His Honour Judge BARBER, Q.C.)

Re MALTHOUSE CLOSE AND SETTLED LAND ACT. Jurisdiction of County Court-Settled Land Act 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 38), 88. 36, 48-Land, definition of Trustees.

Fisher, Wirksworth, solicitor for the petitioner.

His HONOUR.-This is a petition under the Settled Land Act by the tenant for life of certain messuages, land, and hereditaments devised by the will of the petitioner's father, Samuel Radford the elder. The close of land the subject of this application is known as the Malthouse Close, and is clearly proved to be of a value less than £500. But it forms only a portion of the property settled by the above-mentioned devise, and if the value of the other portions is taken into account, the value of the whole settled estate largely exceeds £500. The petitioner is now applying for the appointment of trustees of the settlement in order that he may effect a sale of the Malthouse Close under the provisions of the Settled Land Act, and, for the present at any rate, he has no intention of disposing of any other portion of the settled property. The question now is, have I power to entertain this application, and I am of opinion that I have not. It was strongly urged by Mr. Fisher that, in construing the 10th subsection of sect. 46 of the Act (which alone gives me any power), the word "land "should be treated as referring to the particular piece of land which is proposed to be dealt with by the petition, and not to any other. If this contention were right, this might happen: there might be different appointments of (it might be) different trustees of the same settlement for the purpose of effecting sales of different portions of the settled

estates or any settled estate, however large, might be brought within the jurisdiction of the County Court if the tenant for life were willing to sell it by driblets. This cannot have been the intention of the Act. There is nothing to show that a large settlement may be subdivided into a group of smaller ones. On the contrary, the 38th section enables "the court, if it thinks fit, where there are no trustees of a settlement within the definition of the Act, to appoint fit persons to be trustees under the settlement for the purposes of this Act." This must mean trustees under the settlement as a whole and once for all, not trustees under a small portion of the settlement. It is clear that a County Court judge has no jurisdiction to appoint trustees of the whole settlement, if the value of the settled lands exceeds £500, and the Act, in my opinion, confers no power on any court to make piecemeal appointments for the purpose of carrying out a particular sale of part of the settled lands. I cannot therefore accede to this application. I wish I could, for I think it a well-meant attempt to effect a sale of this small property at a trifling cost. I will only add that, so far as I am aware, there is no reported authority on this point, and my decision is based solely on my own construction of the Act.

LIVERPOOL COUNTY COURT.
Saturday, June 21.

(Before Deputy-Judge GOLDTHORPE.)
THE VELOCIFERO.

Ship-Necessaries-Brokerage and commission-County Courts Admiralty
Jurisdiction Act 1868, s. 388 (2)—Evidence-Register kept abroad.
THE question whether brokerage and commission on services rendered by
a shipbroker could form the subject of a claim in the County Court under
31 & 32 Vict. c. 71, s. 3, came before Deputy-Judge Goldthorpe in the
Liverpool County Court in an action in which judgment was given on the
21st inst. A ship's agent, named Viacava, of Queenstown, rendered cer-
tain services in and about repairs to the Italian barque Velocifero, in Jan.
and Feb. 1889, and in acting as interpreter during the illness of the
captain, and failing to obtain payment of his charges arrested the ship in
Liverpool in Jan. 1890, and brought an action in the County Court there for
a sum of £22 10s. The Brothers Guerello, of Genoa, the present owners,
appeared under protest and defended the action.

T. J. Squarey, for the plaintiff, called evidence to the effect that valuable services had been rendered, and that but for the plaintiff's superintendence the ship would have been in great difficulties. If not, tho owners, the defendants, led the plaintiff to believe they were, and are estopped.

[ocr errors]

O. H. Hardy for the defendants. First, brokerage and commission are not necessaries as defined by judges of the Admiralty Court. If the necessaries have been already supplied, and the question is only one of payment, such payment is not "necessary" to enable the ship to put to sea; otherwise, if money is advanced to pay for supplies which could not otherwise be obtained, although perhaps the material men themselves might proceed in rem for payment: (The N. R. Gosfabrick, Swa. 344; The Albert Crosby, 3 Ad. & E. 37.) The cases show a slow development from the time when no one but the provider of food or anchor, cables, &c., could sue for the supply of necessaries, but the services of a broker have never been included: (The Comtesse de Freguville, 4 L. T. Rep. N. S. 713; The Underwriter, 25 L. T. Rep. N. S. 279.) If the services were rendered, economy is not a "" necessary. The statute was passed to enable foreign ships to get supplies to fit them as sea-going vessels. In The Riga (26 L. T. Rep. N. S. 202) and The Turlioni (32 L. T. Rep. N. S. 841), in which brokerage was allowed to go to proof, the ship was already under arrest in another action, and the question was only of the report by the registrar on admitted claims, no opposition being offered. Secondly, the defendants were not owners; on this head, an examined copy of the register kept at Genoa according to the Italian law was put in, and showed that the vessel was at the time the property of one Bozzo, and Mr. Guerello proved that he was acting as agent for the owner. In the absence of the Patenta or sailing register, which is at sea, this is the best evidence. [The JUDGE.-Is not all secondary evidence of equal value? The captain told the plaintiff your client was owner.] No; this is made evidence by Italian law, and it is an Italian ship. Thirdly, estoppel cannot give rise to an action in rem. It is at most matter for a common law action.

[ocr errors]

Squarey in reply.-The tendency of the decisions quoted is to enlarge the definition of necessaries." Here the ship practically could not have sailed without the plaintiff's services. The Turliani is an authority in my favour; also Webster v. Secamp (4 B. & Ald. 352); and Maule & Pollock on Merchant Shipping, pp. 99 and following pages. The captain, in a declaration made before the consul at Queenstown, said the defendants were owners, and they never said they were not till now.

66

His HONOUR had reserved his judgment for consideration, and now delivered it in favour of the defendants on both points raised. The cases, he said, are somewhat conflicting, but the principle to be found in them is against the claim of any such services as these to be classed as necessaries," however valuable they may have been at the time. The statute deals with other matters, such as seaworthiness, and no doubt the actual caterers could have maintained the action, but they were all paid by those who were owners at the time. Secondly, there is no reason to doubt the Italian register. It is kept according to Italian law, and shows the defendants were not the owners. They, however, allowed the plaintiff to remain under the impression that they were owners, and on that An ground should not get the costs of proving they were not owners. order was then agreed to as to costs. Judgment for the defendants. Solicitors for plaintiffs, Banks and Kendall; for defendants, C. A. M. Lightbound.

LAW LIBRARY.

BOOKS RECEIVED.

An Historical Sketch of the Equitable Jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery. By D. M. Kerly, Barrister-at-Law. C. J. Clay and Sons, Cambridge University Press Warehouse, Ave Maria-lane.

Gibson and Weldon's Intermediate Examination Digest. SecondEdition. Law Notes Publishing Offices, 31, Chancery-lane, W.C. Gibson's Aids to the Final. Seventh Edition. Law Notes Publishing Offices.

Gibson's Intermediate Law Examination made Easy. Eighth Edition. Law Notes Publishing Offices.

GENERAL INTELLIGENCE.

VACATION BUSINESS.

Wednesday, Sept. 3.

(Before LAWRANCE, J., sitting as Vacation Judge.)

GILBERT v. CARTE.

Receiver-Management of business-Action for account-Action in nature of specific performance-Manager-Continuing business. THE plaintiff William Schwenk Gilbert, the defendant Sir A. S. Sullivan, and the defendant Richard D'Oyley Carte, the owner of the Savoy Theatre, entered into an agreement, dated the 8th Feb. 1883, that Gilbert and Sullivan should grant to the defendant Carte, from Nov. 1882 to Dec. 1887, the sole right of representation and performance of a certain opera. Carte, by the agreement, agreed to pay to each of them, Gilbert and Sullivan, one-third of the net profits earned by the representations after deducting all expenses and charges of producing the operas, including a rental of £4000 per annum and all rates, taxes, &c. The accounts of the performances to be made up every three months from the 25th Nov. 1882, and the net profits ascertained and the proportions paid. The agreement was not to constitute a partnership between the parties. In July of this year the plaintiff Gilbert brought an action against the defendant Carte for an account of the net profits according to the terms of the agreement of the representations and performances at the Savoy theatre during the original term of five years and thirty-one days therein mentioned, and subsequently of the operas written and composed jointly by the plaintiff and Sir A. S. Sullivan, and for payment of one-third of the amount of such net profits and for a receiver. The plaintiff now moved that one James Harris, an accountant, or some other fit and proper person, might be appointed receiver of the takings of the theatre during the time the opera of the "Gondoliers" was being performed, and that in the meantime an interim receiver might be appointed without security. The plaintiff's evidence was to the effect that it was the custom for Carte, or one of the officials at the theatre, to furnish him with nightly returns of the receipts of the theatre, and from such returns he was enabled to state that the takings at the said theatre for the quarter from the 4th April to the 4th July 1890 had amounted to at least £20,000, and from his knowledge of the working of the theatre he was able to say that the expenses had not exceeded £11,000, so that the net profits for the period aforesaid (during which time the opera of the "Gondoliers" had been performed at the theatre) had been £9000 at least; that his share of the lastmentioned net profits amounted to the sum of £3000 at least, and although he had applied through his solicitors for payment of the same, the defendant Carte withheld payment; that performances of the "Gondoliers" continued nightly at the theatre, and that further profits were accruing, to a third share of which he was entitled; that it had been the custom to divide the net profits from the performances at the theatre immediately after the end of each quarter, and from the neglect of the defendant Carte to pay the plaintiff his share of the profits of the quarter ending the 4th July 1890, he could only conclude that he had used the money for other purposes and purposes of his own, and accordingly he desired the appointment of a receiver at the theatre to ensure his receipt of his share of the accruing profits to which he was entitled as aforesaid. The evidence was very considerable, and the case lasted several hours, but the above facts are all that need be stated for the purposes of this report.

Fischer, Q.C. and Mitchell, for the motion, said the question was whether the defendant should be allowed to continue to act, as he was doing, in violation of his agreement, and that he was not entitled to deal with future receipts as he pleased. This was an action in the nature of specific performance of an agreement, and it could not be said that the plaintiff was seeking to obtain through the instrumentality of a receiver the management of the business. Nor was it an application for payment, but simply for the appointment of a receiver to which the plaintiff was clearly entitled. The defendant Carte was only entitled under the agreement to receive the moneys on rendering an account, and he had broken the agreement. The plaintiff did not ask for a manager, but only for a receiver. They referred to Lindley on Partnership, book 3, ch. 10.

Marten, Q.C. and Ryland for the defendant Carte.-The plaintiff has mistaken his remedy which is an action for account. The defendant Carte was sole licensee, and the plaintiff had no right to a receiver against him, but he should have taken out a summons for an account, which was a simple and his proper remedy. The agreement plainly showed that the effect of the appointment of a receiver would be to take the profits of the theatre from the defendant Carte, and was moreover against the express words of and inconsistent with the agreement. It was never contemplated that Carte's possession of the theatre should be interfered with, and certainly the plaintiff had no right whatever to interfere with his possession. This application was in effect asking for a manager to be appointed, which the court never did unless with a view to putting an end to a business or partnership. Macnaghten for Sir A. S. Sullivan.

Fischer in reply. The receiver would not in any way interfere with Carte's management of the theatre.

LAWRANCE, J. said that there was some difficulty as to the question of appointing a receiver, and he should like to have some time to consider it.

Finally an order of compromise was agreed to, that the defendant Carte undertaking to pay the plaintiff £1000 to-morrow (Sept. 4), and to deliver the July account within four (weeks, and to pay plaintiff any balance that might appear to be due to him on the account, the payment of the £1000 to be without prejudice to any question. No order was made on the motion, except that costs were to be costs in the action. Solicitors: Bolton and Mote; Stanley and Woodhouse; Lewis and Lewis.

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

joint accounts, one at least of the stockholders must be over twenty-one years of age, and proof of the date of birth of any stockholder under twenty-one years of age must be lodged with the Bank of England.

The investment of a dividend will not take place until about a month after it is due, thus giving a stockholder the opportunity of taking any particular dividend if circumstances render it desirable. Such taking of any dividend, or dividends, by the stockholder will not interfere with the investment by the Bank of England of subsequent dividends.

For each pound, or part of a pound, invested, there will be a charge of one penny. Should a stockholder wish to be informed of each investment, the Bank of England will furnish particulars for an additional charge of three pence per quarter.

These charges will be deducted from the dividends before the investments are made.

Orders for the investment of dividends will be cancelled by the death of a stockholder; or, by the stock reaching the sum of £1000; and may, at any time, be withdrawn in writing.

Forms can now be obtained on personal application at the Head Office of the Bank of England, or at any of the branches. Written applications should be addressed to "The Chief Accountant, Bank of England, London." In a short time forms will also be obtainable at money-order offices.

Bank of England, Sept. 2, 1890.

UNCLAIMED STOCK AND DIVIDENDS IN THE BANK OF ENGLAND. [Transferred to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, and which will be paid to the persons respectively whose names are prefixed to each in three months from the date given, unless some other claimants sooner appear.] ANDREWS (Catherine), 21, Norfolk-crescent, Hyde Park, spinster. £510 £2 158. per Cent. Consolidated Stock, late Reduced Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimant, said C. Andrews. Aug. 26.

LEWIS (Caroline), Cleveland-terrace, Paddington, widow. A dividend on the sum of £1500 Consolidated Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimant, William Burrowes Lewis, acting executor of the said C. Lewis. Aug. 27.

HEIRS-AT-LAW AND NEXT OF KIN. NEIGHBOUR (Phoebe), 211, Cowley-road, Oxford, widow. Her nephews and nieces to send in, by Oct. 11, the particulars of their claims to Messrs. G. Mallam and Son, solicitors, 1, 8t. Aldate's, Oxford.

APPOINTMENTS UNDER THE JOINT-STOCK WINDING-UP AOTS.

C. H. BRINDLE AND COMPANY LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Sept. 17, before the Deputy of the Chancellor of the County Palatine of Lancaster, at the sitting of the Court at the Chancery office, Winckley-street, Preston. A. S. Mather, Law Association-buildings, 13, Harrington-street, Liverpool, solicitors for the petitioners.

GATLING ARMS AND AMMUNITION COMPANY LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Sept. 10, before Mr. Justice Lawrance. S. Whitehead, 188, Fleet-street, agent for Milward and Co., Birmingham, solicitors for the petitioner. LANDED ESTATES AGENCY LIMITED.-Mr. Justice North has, by an order dated Aug. 12, appointed Gerard van de Linde, 12, Laurence Pountney-lane, Cannon-street, chartered accountant, to be official liquidator. Creditors to send in, by Oct. 1, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to the said Mr. G. van de Linde. Nov. 12, at twelve o'clock, at the chambers of Mr. Justice North, is the time appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon such claims. RICHARDS, TERRY, AND CO. LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Oct 20, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr J. M. Richards, 46, Holborn-viaduct, the liquidator of the company. RICHARDS AND ARNOLD LIMITED.- Creditors to send in, by Oct. 20, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr J. M. Richards, 46, Holborn-viaduct, the liquidator of the company. RAJAWELLE COFFEE ESTATE COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Oct. 14, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr P. Moir, the liquidator of the company, addressed to him, at the offices of Messrs. Kinsey, Ade, and Hocking, solicitors, 9, Bloomsbury-place. STANDARD BANK OF MANCHESTER LIMITED.-The Vice-Chancellor of the County Palatine of Lancaster has, by an order dated July 25, appointed Edwin Storer, 26, Mosley-street, Manchester, chartered accountant, to be official liquidator.

WILLIAM JOHNSON AND COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Oct. 7, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. T. Worthington, 31, King-street, Wigan, Lancashire, the official liquidator of the company. WANZER LIMITED.-Order for winding-up made by Mr. Justice Lawrance on Aug. 27. Munns and Longden. YORKSHIRE AERATED BREAD AND RESTAURANT COMPANY LIMITED.-Order for continuation of voluntary winding-up made by Mr. Justice Lawrance on Aug. 20. R. Bartram, St. Stephen's. chambers, Telegraph-street, solicitor for the petitioner.

OREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VIOT., 0. 85.

Last Day of Claim, and to whom Particulars to be sent. ASHWIN (John), Gordon House, Ledbury, Herefordshire, gentleman. Sept. 30; H. V. Smith, solicitor, South-parade, Ledbury. BARRY (William Henry), 23, Westbourne-terrace, Paddington, and of 7, Birchin-lane, stockbroker. Oct. 31: Cooper, Walker, and Hall, solicitors, 7, Birchin-lane. BANNATYNE (John), formerly of Ashton House, Kingston-crescent, Portsmouth, Hampshire, late of 15. Whitefield-terrace, Plymouth, Devonshire, retired inspector of machinery, R.N.; and his widow, BANNATYNE (Ann Fowell Maria). Sept. 30; G. Gidley and Son, solicitors, 17, Saltash-street, Plymouth.

BELL (Ann), Victoria-street, Great Grimsby, Lincolnshire, widow. Oct. 1; Daubney and Bates, solicitors, Brewery-street, Great Grimsby.

BOUSKILL (Thomas), 79, Sacklands-street, Southport, Lancashire, railway servant. Nov. 25;
F. Whitaker, solicitor, Duchy of Lancaster Office, Lancaster-place, Strand.
BUCK (Edward), Beccles, Suffolk, wine and spirit merchant and wool stapler. (Including any

claims in respect of carrying on the business since his death on Jan. 29, 1887.) Oct. 1; D. R. Read, solicitor, Wickham Market, Suffolk.

BEAN (Alfred William), Danson Park, Welling, Kent, gentleman. Nov. 15; Smith and Mammatt,
solicitors, Ashby-de-la-Zouch.
CHETWYND (William Henry), Longdon Hall, Staffordshire, gentleman. Oct. 1; H. S. Chinn and
Son, solicitors, The Close, Lichfield.

CLARKE (Rev. William Corden), Hunt Bridge House, Matlock, Derbyshire, clerk in holy orders;
and his widow, CLARKE (Mary Anne Poore Corden). Oct. 1; J. Potter, solicitor, Matlock
Bridge.
Oct. 31:

DAVEY (Ann Ayscough), Elm House, South-parade, Kingston-upon-Hull, widow.
Levett, Champney, and Tayler, solicitors, 6, Parliament-street, Hull.
DALGLISH (Annie Holmes), Kington, Herefordshire, spinster. Oct. 1; Temple and Philpin,
solicitors, Kington, Herefordshire.

DIAPER (Ambrose), formerly of Little Glen, near Leicester, late of Great Holland, Essex, retired
farmer. Sept. 13; Pope, Marshall, and Potter, solicitors, Trinity-street, Colchester.
DAWSON (Mary), Keelby, Lincolnshire, widow. Sept. 29; Haddelsey and Sons, solicitors,
Caistor.

ECCLES (Charles Joseph), Shacklefield House, Godalming, Surrey, gentleman. Oct. 1; J. G.
Scott, solicitor, 325, High Holborn.

FOSTER (Henry Granger), Brook Lodge, Rainford, Lancashire, colliery proprietor. Oct. 1;
Oliver Jones, Billson, and Co., solicitors, 5, Cook-street, Liverpool.

GOOCH (Margaret Ann), 47, Newmarket-road, Heigham, widow. Oct. 1; Winter, Francis, and
Back, solicitors, 22, St. Giles-street, Norwich.
GRIFFITHS (Robert), Stafford, architect and county surveyor of Staffordshire. Sept. 30; Hand
and Co., solicitors, Stafford.

GOWAN (George Mauleverer), 20, Beauchamp-square, Leamington, Warwickshire. Sept. 30;
Hulberts and Hussey, solicitors, 10, New-square, Lincoln's-inn.
GOODRICH (James), Eyarth House, Ruthin, Denbighshire, gentleman. Oct. 31; Whitcomb and
Cardom, solicitors, 19, College-green, Gloucester.
GREENMAN (John), Brinkworth, Wiltshire, gentleman. Sept. 30; Clark and Smith, solicitors,
Malmesbury, Wilts.

GREENMAN (David), Brinkworth, retired innkeeper.

Malmesbury, Wilts.

Sept. 30; Clark and Smith, solicitors,

GEORGE (James), Newport, Isle of Wight, gentleman. Sept. 30; J. Eldridge and Sons, solicitors, Newport, Isle of Wight.

HARPIN (Mary Ann), New Cross, Wednesfield, Staffordshire, widow. Oct. 1; Waterhouse and Son, solicitors, 45, Queen-street, Wolverhampton.

HISCOCKS (Samuel Watkins), Royal hotel, Deal, Kent, hotel keeper. Oct. 18, J. M. Edwards, solicitor, Ramsgate.

HEWITT (John), Wrinchill, Betley, Staffordshire, gentleman. Oct. 1; Wright and Co., solicitors, 17, Water-street, Liverpool.

HOLDER (John Alleyne), the Lodge, Gatton Point, Redhill, Surrey, gentleman. Sept, 30; R. J. Child and Son, solicitors, 12, Furnival's-inn, Holborn.

HOPKINS (John), Carlton-terrace, Swansea, accountant. Sept. 30; W. Cox, solicitor, Adelaidechambers, Swansea.

HULSE (Mary), 20, Eccleston-road, Ealing Dean, spinster. Oct. 1; G. Stevenson and Son, solicitors, 11, New-street, Leicester.

HILL (Edwin), Devonport, Devonshire, grocer. Sept 30; J. Graves, solicitor, Devonport HARVEY (Christian Bargrave), The Lodge, Upper Deal, Kent, widow. Oct. 15; 8t. Barbe Sladen and Wing, solicitors, 1, Delay-street, Westminster.

LAW SOCIETIES.

JAGGER (John), Boston Spa, Yorkshire, stonemason. Oct. 25; B. Dent, solicitor, 16, Blake-street, York.

JAQUES (Joseph), Balby, near Doncaster, Yorkshire, farmer. Sept. 30; W. H. Palmer, solicitor, 6, St. Sepulchre-gate, Doncaster.

KELSEY (Edward Lewis), 248, Regent-street, silk mercer, and of Westleigh, Harold-road, Margate, Kent. Oct. 1; Phillips, Son, and Vallings, solicitors, 27, Nicholas-lane.

KELK (Helen Jane), 15, Victoria-road, Kensington, spinster. Oct. 15; Saxton and Morgan, solicitors, 29, Somerset-street, Portman-square.

LEECE (Henry Edward), late an inmate of the London County Lunatic Asylum, Banstead, near
Sutton, Surrey, Oct. 1; A. C. Cronin, solicitor, 22, Southampton-street, Bloomsbury.
LEETE (Alfred), 11, Ashchurch-terrace, Shepherd's Bush, engineer, Oct. 1; J. Holmes and Son,
solicitors, 34, Clement's-lane, Lombard-street.

LONG (James), Henlow, near Biggleswade, Bedfordshire, farmer. Oct. 2; H. H. Wells, solicitor, 10, Paternoster-row.

MULVEY (Ann), Lime Cottage, Addiscombe-road, Croydon, and of 32, Wellesley-road, Croydon, Surrey, late of 63, Marina, St. Leonards-on-Sea, Sussex, spinster. Sept. 30; Cooper, Walker, and Hall, solicitors, 7, Birchin-lane.

MIDDLETON (Thomas John), formerly of Longacre, artists' colourman, late of 195, Railton-road,
Herne Hill, Surrey, gentleman. Sept. 24; Rodgers and Clarkson, solicitors, 4, Walbrook.
MILLER (Henry Blake), Norwich, gentleman. Sept. 29; Miller, Stevens, and Son, solicitors,
Bank-chambers, Norwich.

MILTHORP (Harriet), Old George inn, Meadow-lane, Leeds, Yorkshire, widow, innkeeper.
Sept. 26; Emsley, Son, and Smith, solicitors, 16, East-parade, Leeds.
MCAUSLAND (Emma Elizabeth), Fernleigh Lodge, Mannamead, Plymouth, Devonshire, formerly
of 6, East-grove, Cardiff, Glamorganshire, widow. Oct. 4; J. F. Hawken, solicitor, Plymouth.
MYLNE (Robert William), 7, Whitehall-place, and of Great Amwell, Hertfordshire, gentleman.
Oct. 9; Farrer and Co., solicitors, 66, Lincoln's-inn-fields.

NEIGHBOUR (Phoebe), 211, Cowley-road, Oxford, widow. Oct. 11; G. Mallam and Son, solicitors, 1, St. Aldate's, Oxford.

PEARSON (Christopher), Westminster-road, Liverpool, engineer; and his widow, PEARSON (Mary
Ann). Oct. 17; James and Smith, solicitors, 22, Lord-street, Liverpool.
ROBINSON (Joseph), Etal Villa, Tynemouth, shipowner; and his widow ROBINSON (Elizabeth
Hogg). Oct. 31; H. A. Adamson, solicitor, 99, Howard-street, North Shields.
RAMSON (Joseph Thomas), Percy-street, Lower Moss-lane, Manchester, licensed victualler.
Sept. 30; Parkinson and Hess, solicitors, Imperial-chambers, 62, Dale-street, Liverpool.
SCHOFIELD (Caroline), formerly of Broomhall Park, Sheffield, late of 23, Ashdele-road, Broomhill,
Sheffield, spinster. Oct. 31; Burdekin, Benson, and Burdekin, solicitors, 41, Norfolk-street,
Sheffield.
STOCKS (Louisa), 15, Porchester-square. Oct. 7; A. F. and R. W. Tweedie, solicitors, 5, Lincoln's.
inn-fields.
SMITH (James), Spencer Villa, 66, Brixton-road, Surrey, gentleman. Sept. 29; Lumley and
Lumley, solicitors, 15, Old Jewry-chambers, Bank.
SACKVILLE (The Right Hon. Mortimer, Baron), Knole, Kent. Oct. 8; Meynell and Pemberton,

solicitors, 20, Whitehall-place.

THOMAS (Samuel), Carr's-street, Hurst Cross, near Ashton-under-Lyne, Lancashire, coal merchant. Oct. 1; J. Whitworth, solicitor, 111, Old-street, Ashton-under-Lyne.

VERNON (Hannah), 10, Warde-street, Hulme, Lancashire, widow. Sept. 30; R. F. Gee, solicitor, 2, Clarence-street, Manchester.

WOODMAN (Alice), Cheltenham-villas, Carshalton-road, Sutton, Surrey, widow. Oct. 6; T. D. Pettiver, solicitor, 21, College-hill.

WILSON (Christopher), 40, Nursling-street, Leicester, optician. Oct. 25; Stretton and Ayson, solicitors, Leicester.

WARREN (George), Timperley, Cheshire, farmer. Sept. 30; R. F. Gee, solicitor, 2, Clarencestreet, Manchester. WHITTLE (William), Picton-road, Wavertree, near Liverpool, feather merchant and bedding and curled hair. manufacturer. Nov. 1; J. F. Leigh Clare, solicitor, Central-buildings, North John-street, Liverpool.

WORRALL (James Preston), formerly of Rosehill, Cheadle, Staffordshire, late of Dalkeith Lodge, Southsea, Southampton, gentleman. Oct. 18; Farrar and Hall, solicitors, 29, Fountain-street, Manchester.

WRAGG (George), 8, House, 44, Court, Grosvenor street West, Birmingham. Sept. 29; Snow and Atkins, solicitors, Priory-chambers, Minories, Birmingham.

WATSON (Rev. Charles), York, clerk. Oct. 25; B. Dent, solicitor, 16, Blake-street, York. WHITEFOORD (Charles), 74, St. John's Wood-terrace, St. John's Wood, gentleman. Oct. 6; Seagrove and Woods, solicitors, 22, Chancery-lane.

WALTERS (George), 67 and 68, Wilson-street, Finsbury, and of 77, Libra-road, Old Ford, blacksmith. Oct. 1; A. F. Fox, solicitor, 59 and 60, Chancery.lane.

WEBSTER (Elizabeth Ann). Quarry Fieid, North Down-lane, Bideford, Devonshire, spinster. Oct. 31; W. H. Speed, solicitor, 13, St. Peter's-gate, Nottingham.

WEST (Louisa), East Howe, Kinson, Dorsetshire, spinster. Oct. 6; Dickinson and Prior, solicitors, Fish-street, Poole.

WEST (John), Bishop's Waltham, Southampton, butcher. Sept. 22; W. H. Gater, solicitor, Bishop's Waltham.

INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY.-ANNUAL PROVINCIAL

MEETING.

THE following circular has been issued by the Secretary :-Dear Sir,I have the pleasure to inform you that the council have accepted an invitation to hold the seventeenth annual provincial meeting of the abovementioned society for the present year at Nottingham. It will accordingly be held in the University College, Shakespeare-street, in that town, on Tuesday and Wednesday, the 7th and 8th Oct. next, and the proceedings will be as follows:

:

Monday, the 6th Oct.-His Worship the Mayor of Nottingham and the Mayoress will receive the President and the members of the society at the Castle Museum in the evening.

Tuesday, the 7th Oct.-The president of the Local Law Society will receive the members attending the meeting at 11 a.m., and the president of the Incorporated Law Society will afterwards take the chair and deliver his address. This will be followed by the reading of papers contributed by members of the society. The meeting will adjourn from 1.30 to 2.30 for luncheon, and close at 4.30. In the evening the members attending the meeting will dine together, the President of the Nottingham Incorporated Law Society taking the chair. Tickets for the dinner will be 30s. each. Mrs. McCraith, the wife of the vice-president of the Nottingham Incorporated Law Society, will receive the ladies attending with members at an At Home" at the Exchange Rooms, Market-place. Wednesday, the 8th Oct.-The meeting will be resumed at 11 a.m., when the reading of papers and discussions thereon will be continued. The meeting will adjourn from 1.30 to 2.30 for luncheon, and close at 4.30. On this evening there will be a special private performance at the Theatre Royal.

On Thursday, the 9th Oct., arrangements will be probably made for a visit to the Dukeries and a drive through Sherwood Forest.

Each member will be entitled to take one lady to the mayor's reception, to the theatre, and to the excursion.

If you propose to read a paper, I shall be obliged if you will inform me the title and purport of it by the 15th Sept. The paper itself should be placed in my hands on or before the 22nd Sept., in order that it may bo printed for circulation at the earliest possible moment after the close of the proceedings.

Subject to the control of the president of the Incorporated Law Society, each gentleman attending the meeting will be at liberty to speak, and to vote upon any matter under discussion; but all resolutions expressive of the sentiments of the meeting will be framed in the form of recommendations or requests to the council to take the subjects of such resolutions into their consideration.

The sixty-fifth half-yearly meeting of the Solicitors' Benevolent Association will be held at the University College, Shakespeare-street, on Wednesday, the 8th Oct., at 10 a.m.

THE RATING OF ORCHARDS. The Local Government Board have issued to the overseers of the poor of every parish in England and Wales a circular under the Public Health (Rating of Orchards) Act 1890, in which they say that, "where the amount required by any precept or precepts of the rural sanitary authority in respect of special expenses is £10 or upwards, and is such that a rate of one penny in the pound or upwards would be required to raise the amount, sect. 230 of the Public Health Act 1875 provides that the overseers shall raise the contribution required by the levy (in the case of an entire parish on the whole of such parish, and in the case of a contributory place or part of a contributory place forming part of a parish, on such place, or such part thereof, exclusive of the rest of the parish) of a separate rate in the same manner as if it were a rate for the relief of the poor, with certain exceptions. One of these exceptions is, that the occupier of any land used as arable, meadow, or pasture ground only, or as woodlands, market gardens, or nursery grounds, shall, where a special assessment is made for the purpose of such rate, be assessed in respect of one-fourth part only of the rateable value thereof, or, where no special assessment is made, shall pay in respect of the said property onefourth part only of the rate in the pound payable in respect of houses and other property. From the date mentioned, moreover, it will be the duty of the overseers, in making and levying any separate rate for special expenses, to assess the occupiers of orchards to the same extent as occupiers of arable lands and market gardens are now assessed in respect of similar rates. With regard to any such separate rate already made, or to be made on or before the 1st Oct. next, it is provided that nothing in the Act shall apply to the rate; so that if in any rate made on or before the date in question the occupiers of orchards are assessed on the full rateable value, the Act will not as regards such rate have the effect of establishing any right on the part of such occupiers to the partial exemption provided for by the Act of 1875, whether the rate is paid before the 1st Oct. or not." A similar circular has been sent to other rating authorities.

BILLS OF SALE. The number of bills of sale in England and Wales, registered at the Queen's Bench for the week ending Aug. 30 was 137. The number in the corresponding week of last year was 151, and the corresponding weeks for the three previous years 230, 229, and 232.— Stubbs' Weekly Gazette.

COMMERCIAL FAILURES.-According to Kemp's Mercantile Gazette the number of failures in England and Wales gazetted during the week ending Aug. 30 was 68. The number in the corresponding week of last year was 74, showing a decrease of 6, being a net decrease in 1890, to date, of 410.

WARNING TO INTENDING HOUSE PURCHASERS AND LESSEES.-Before purchasing or renting a house have the sanitary arrangements thoroughly examined by an expert from the Sanitary Engineering and Ventilation Company, 65, Victoria-street, Westminster opposite Town Hall [Established 1875], who also undertake the Ventilation of Offices, &c.-[ADVT.] STAMMERERS should read a book by a gentleman who cured himself after suffering nearly forty years. Price 13 stamps. B. Beasley, Brampton Park, near Huntingdon. Advt.

The PRACTICE of INTERPLEADER by SHERIFFS and HIGH BAILIFFS, with Acts, Rules, and Forms.-By Daniel Warde, of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law; formerly Solicitor of the Supreme Court, and London Agent for the Officers of the Sheriff of Lancashire. Price 3s. 6d., post free, handy pocket size.-HORACE Cox, "Law Times" Office, 10, Welling ton-street, Strand, W.C.-[ADVT.]

CORRESPONDENCE.

This Department being open to free discussion on all Professional topics, the Editor does not hold himself responsible for any opinions or statements contained in it.

STAMP DUTY ON TRANSFERS OF MORTGAGES.-We can tell your correspondents "A. and B." that the Inland Revenue officials do impose penalties on persons seeking to rectify a mistake in the duty on a transfer of a mortgage, where interest is transferred in addition to principal. For some years we were under the impression that duty was not payable on accrued interest included in a transfer. Recently, in dealing with a mortgage which was transferred by indorsement in 1875, we examined the stamp and found it was stamped in respect of the principal only, and not in respect of some accrued interest which was assigned. After consideration we decided to get the duty rectified, for which purpose we had to pay the deficient duty, sixpence, and the full penalty of £10, and then present a memorial for a remission or return of the latter. The board returned us £8; but thinking that was, under the circumstances (it being evident there was no intention to defraud the Revenue), not enough, we wrote a letter of remonstrance, and succeeded in getting back £1 more. We consider even then the penalty inflicted was too much, and that a nominal one would have met the justice of the case. C. and D.

I notice, in your issue of last week, a letter from "A. and B." concerning the stamp duty on transfers of mortgages. They ask whether the Inland Revenue are imposing penalties on those who seek to rectify their mistake. I may say I have written to Somerset House, and got a reply that the authorities are ready to receive any transfers of mortgages which have not been stamped in respect of the accrued interest, and they will stamp the same without penalty up to the 31st Dec. 1890. The deeds must be forwarded to the board with a statement of the facts. G. R. GRAY.

NOTES AND QUERIES.

None are inserted unless the name and address of the writer are sent, not necessarily for publication, but as a guarantee of bona fides.

Queries.

30. SETTLED LAND ACT.-A. devised a mansion and lands to his son B. absolutely. B. is about twelve years old. A. appointed C. trustee of the will for all the purposes of the Settled Land Act. Can C. sell the estate on behalf of B., and give a good discharge for the purchase money? It is to be noticed that there is only one trustee at present to receive and invest the purchase money. I may mention that O. is sole executor, and intends to prove the will. X.

31. VESTRY-OWNER AND OCCUPIER VOTER.-At the annual vestry meeting of the township of Formby, duly convened and held on the 25th March last for the purpose of nominating overseers, and appointing a waywarden for the ensuing year, and of transacting other township business, the following resolution was passed, viz., that it was not necessary or desirable to light the Formby roads with gas. A poll of the ratepayers was demanded, and afterwards took place. At the election the following point arose: Whether an owner of a house who occupied it himself had a double qualification, and was entitled to vote at the poll both as owner and as occupier (rateI shall payer), as in the case of an election for a member of a board of guardians. be obliged if you or any of your readers can refer me to the law deciding this point. OWNER.

82. CONVEYANCE-COSTS.-By agreement dated Feb. 9, 1889, A. agreed to sell a freehold house to B., the title to commence with a certain deed of conveyance. The agreement then proceeded thus: "and no earlier title shall be required by the said B., who shall bear the cost of the conveyance of the property." Both A. and B. employed separate solicitors in carrying out the matter. B.'s solicitor prepared the draft conveyance. A.'s solicitor perused it on behalf of A. after having delivered abstract, &c. Is A.'s solicitor entitled to claim any costs from B., and, if so, what are they? -the scale fee on the purchase money of £800, or the costs for perusing, copying, examining, &c., the draft deed of conveyance, obtaining execution of deed, attendance on completion, &c.? The opinions of some of your readers would oblige. GRADUS.

33. RESERVATION OF MINES AND MINERALS.-We shall be glad if any of your readers can refer us to a case which has decided that it is not necessary to reserve the mines and minerals in a building lease, for the reason that they are reserved by implication to the lessor with incidental powers of raising and working. We have an impression there is such a case, and we are all the more confirmed in our opinion by the fact that Prideaux, in his Precedents, vol. 2, Leases, Precedents XIII. and XIV., makes no mention of such a reservation.' MINES AND MINERALS.

PROMOTIONS AND APPOINTMENTS. Information intended for publication under the above heading should reach us not later than Thursday morning in each week, as publication is otherwise delayed.

Mr. W. HOOD, of the firm of Aird and Hood, solicitors, 4, Brabantcourt, Philpot-lane, E.C., has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths. Mr. Hood was admitted in July 1884.

LEGAL OBITUARY.

This department is contributed by EDWARD WALFORD, M.A., formerly Scholar of Balliol Coll, Oxford, Fellow of the Royal Historical Society of Great Britain; and as it is desired to make it as perfect a record as possible, the families and friends of deceased members of the Profession will oblige us by forwarding to the LAW TIMES Office any dates and materials required for a biographical notice.

W. ALDAM, Esq.-The late William Aldam, Esq., barrister-at-law, of Frickley Hall, Yorkshire, whose death occurred on the 1st Aug., at the age of seventy-seven, was the elder son of the late William Aldam, Esq., by his marriage with Sarah, daughter of the late Joseph Jewitt, Esq., of Leeds. He was born in 1813, and was educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, where he took the usual degrees in 1836-39. Having been entered as a student in the year 1836, he was called to the bar at the Middle Temple in 1839. He was a magistrate and deputy-lieutenant for the West Riding of Yorkshire, and for many years acted as chairman of the quarter sessions. He also served as high sheriff of Yorkshire in 1878. He sat in Parliament as one of the members for Leeds from 1841 down to 1847 in the Liberal interest. He was much esteemed throughout his native county on account of his ability, integrity, firm and honourable conduct, especially as chairman of quarter sessions, and his business habits were highly appreciated even by his political opponents. Mr. Aldam married, in 1845, Mary Stables, daughter of the Rev. Godfrey Wright, of Bilham Hall, Yorkshire, by whom (who died in 1867) he had a family. His eldest son is a magistrate for the West Riding of Yorkshire.

JUDGE ATTHILL.-The late Hon. John Grey Porter Atthill, formerly Chief Justice of St. Lucia, whose death occurred recently at Fair View, Lancing, Sussex, in the seventy-seventh year of his age, was the fourth son of the late Rev. William Atthill, of Brandiston Hall, Norfolk, formerly prebendary of Clogher, and rector of Ardee, Ireland, his mother being Henrietta Maria Eyre, daughter of the Very Rev. George Maunsell, Dean of Leighlin. He was born in 1813, and was educated at Trinity College, Dublin, where he took his Bachelor degree in 1835, and was called to the Irish bar at King's Inns, Dublin, in the Easter Term of the following year. He afterwards proceeded Bachelor of Laws. He had enjoyed a very successful practice in the sister island, when he was appointed, about thirty years ago, Chief Justice of St. Lucia and sole judge of the Admiralty Court of that island, a post from which he retired in due course on a well-earned pension.

T. CORNISH, Esq.-The late Thomas Cornish, Esq., solicitor, of Penzance, Cornwall, who died at Penzance, on the 12th Aug. last, in the sixty-first year of his age, was the eldest son of the late Henry Cornish, Esq., of Tavistock, Devonshire, by his marriage with Miss G. Rundle. He was born at Tavistock in the year 1830, and was educated at Blundell's School, Tiverton. He was admitted a solicitor in 1851, and at the time of his death held the following public appointments: (1) Town clerk of Penzance; (2) Clerk to Penzance Union and Rural Sanitary Authority; (3) Superintendent Registrar of Births, Deaths, and Marriages; (4) Registrar of Penzance County Court; (5) Clerk to West Penrith Magistrates; (6) Clerk to the East Penrith Magistrates; (7) Clerk to the Penzance Borough Magistrates; (8) Clerk to Camborne Highway Board; (9) Clerk to Penzance Burial Board; (10) Clerk to Gulval School Board. He was also a perpetual commissioner and commissioner for oaths. In addition to these public appointments Mr. Cornish was, at the time of his death, president of the Penzance Institute, vice-president of the Penzance Natural History and Antiquarian Society (of which he had been president three times previously), and curator to the Royal Cornwall Geological Society. In fact, his name had a prominent place in every public undertaking in the town and county for more than twenty years. He was an F.L.S., and a constant contributor to The Zoologist and previously to The Field and Land and Water. At the International Fisheries Exhibition, London, 1883, he was a member of the committee and a judge in several classes. His knowledge of birds was intimate and scientific. He was the leading mineralogist in Cornwall, and his archæological researches and papers form a large contribution to the transactions of the Penzance Natural History and Archæological Society. He was known as one of the leading advocates in Cornwall, and his opinion on the subject of rating law was highly valued. He was the first volunteer to sign the roll in the county, and became ensign and afterwards lieutenant in the Penzance company, which commission he held for many years. Mr. Cornish married, in 1860, Helen Mary, daughter of John Batten, Esq., of Penzance, by whom he has left a daughter and two sons. His remains were interred at Penzance Cemetery on the 16th Aug. G. D. CROSSMAN, Esq.-The late George Danvers Crossman, Esq., solicitor, of Gloucester, who died at Friezewood, Olveston, Gloucestershire, on the 5th Aug., in the sixty-first year of his age, was the eldest son of the late Thomas Crossman, Esq., of Olveston, by his marriage with Anne

Florence Ward, daughter of Danvers Ward, Esq., of the same place. He was born at Cowbridge, Glamorganshire, in the year 1830, and was educated at Grosvenor College, Bath. He was admitted a solicitor in 1851, and was a perpetual commissioner and commissioner for oaths. His life, however, was uneventful, and he held no public appointments. He married, in 1859, Sophia Caroline Hinde, daughter of Hinde, Esq., of Lancaster, who predeceased him without issue. His remains interred at Olveston parish church on the 9th Aug.

were

R. D. GRANT, Esq.-The late Robert Donald Grant, Esq., barrister-atlaw, of the Inner Temple, who died at Cooleen, West Kirby, Cheshire, on the 11th Aug. last, in the fortieth year of his age, was the second son of the late Mr. William Grant, of Thornhill, Forres, in the county of Moray, by his marriage with Miss Elizabeth Cowell. He was born at Forres in the year 1850, and was educated at the Gymnasium of his native city. He was called to the bar at the Middle Temple, London, in 1888; but he did not actively follow his profession, and his career therefore was quite uneventful. He was a magistrate for the county of Moray. He married, in 1871, Miss Eliza Joan Smith, daughter of Dr. J. Stuart Smith, of the Army Medical Service, by whom he has left nine children. His remains were interred at Edinkillie, Morayshire, on the 14th Aug.

E. F. GRIFFIN, ESQ.-The late Edmund Fuller Griffin, Esq., barristerat-law, of Lincoln's-inn, whose death occurred very suddenly on Thurs day, the 24th July at his residence, 35, Acton-street, Gray's-inn-road, in the fifty-first year of his age, was the only son of Edmund Griffin, Esq., of Ilford, Essex, and was born in the year 1839. He was educated at St. Paul's School, and afterwards at Magdalen Hall, Oxford, where he took the usual degrees. He was entered as a student at Lincoln's-inn in Michaelmas Term 1862, and was called to the bar there in June 1865, when he joined the Home, afterwards the South-Eastern Circuit, and attended the Hertfordshire, Essex, and St. Albans Sessions with considerable success. He was for some years lecturer on English Law at King's College, London, and he was well known in the Profession as joint. editor of "Powell on the Law of Evidence." An inquest held on Mr. Griffin on the day after his death resulted in a verdict to the effect that he died from natural causes. Mr. Griffin married, in 1863, Beatrice Fanny, third daughter of Mr. George William Cradock, of Nuneaton, Warwickshire.

W. J. W. INGHAM, ESQ.-The late William James Wright Ingham, barrister-at-law, of the North-Eastern Circuit, whose death, at the age of thirty-seven, occurred on the 31st July, at his residence, 98, Cambridgestreet, Eccleston-square, was the only son of James Ingham, Esq., of Bradford, Yorkshire, and was born on the 21st Oct. 1852. He was educated at Pembroke College, Cambridge, where he took the usual degrees. In Jan. 1874 he was entered as a student at Lincoln's-inn, where he was called to the bar in Jan. 1877. He chose the North-Eastern Circuit, the name of his family being well known in Yorkshire and in the county of Durham, and he attended the Sheffield Sessions.

F. MILNE, Esq.-The late Frank Milne, Esq., formerly one of the registrars of the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice, who died at Hadley, Middlesex, on the 24th July, in the seventy-eighth year of his age, was the fourth son of the late Nathaniel Milne, Esq., solicitor, of Tanfield-court, Temple, and Little Bushey, in the county of Hertford, by his marriage with Miss Margaret Ann Coldbeck. He was born at Islington in the year 1813. He entered as a clerk in the equity side of the old Court of Exchequer in the year 1828 when only fifteen years of age, ard on the abolition of that office in 1841 was appointed to a clerkship in the Chancery Registrar's office, and in 1854 became a principal registrar. He retired on a pension in March 1879, after an honourable career of fifty-one years, and spent the remaining years of his life at Hadley, which was his home for the last thirty-eight years. He married, in 1845, Augusta, third daughter of the late Henry Alexander, of Cork-street, and Piccadilly, the famous oculist, by whom he has left three sons three daughters. His eldest son is Mr. F. A. Milne, of the Chancery Bar. His remains were interred at North Mimms, Herts, on the 30th July.

THE GAZETTES.

Professional Partnerships Dissolved.

Gazette, Aug. 29.

ENGLAND, GEORGE, and BALDWIN, WILLIAM, solicitors, Howden. Jan. 1. The business will in future be carried on by G. England, under style of England and Son. GORDON, PAUL JOSHUA, and GORDON, EDWARD JOHNSTON, solicitors, Lincoin's-inn-fids. Jan. 1. The business will hereafter be carried on by E. J. Gordon, under style of P. J. Gordon and Son.

Gazette, Sept. 2.

MARTINEAU, JOHN PHILIP; WOOLLCOMBE, RICHARD; BLACK, ARTHUR; and FULFORD,
ROBERT LOVEBAND, solicitors, 36, Theobald's-rd, Gray's-inn. So far as regards A. Black.
Aug. 30.
ROE-BROWNE, JAMES LLEWELYN, and DAVIES, EDWARD WILLIAM TWISTON, solicitors, Rhyl.
July 1. Debts by J. L. Roe-Browne, who will in future carry on the business alono.

Bankrupts.

THE BANKRUPTCY ACT 1888. RECEIVING ORDERS.

Gazette, Aug. 29.

To surrender at the High Court of Justice, in Bankruptcy.

BULLOCK, GEORGE SCOTT, late Devons-rd, Bromley, licensed victualler. Pet. Aug. 25. Order Aug. 26.

BURNARD, ROBERT HENRY, and THOMAS, WILLIAM PUGH, Curtain-rd, Shoreditch, upholaterers. Pet. Aug. 27. Order, Aug. 27.

COOKE, FREDERIC, Upper-st, Islington, manufacturer's agent. Pet. Aug. 25. Order, Aug. 26.
PARNELL BROTHERS, Cow Cross-st, printing-ink manufacturers. Pet. Aug. 12. Order, Aug. 27.
RAISON, THOMAS, Leadenhall-st, shipbroker. Pet. July 16. Order, Aug. 23.
TILBY, GEORGE FREDERICK, Seymour-pl, Bryanston-sq, corn dealer. Pet. Aug. 28. Order,
Aug. 26.

To surrender at their respective District Courts.
ADAMS, ELIZA, and MORGAN, CHARLES HERBERT, Olveston, grocers. Ct. Bristol. Pet. Aug. 2,
Order, Aug. 26.
ACOCK, EDWARD, Cheltenham, saddler. Ct. Cheltenham. Pot. Aug. 25. Order, Aug. 25.
ADEY, WILLIAM HERBERT, Salisbury, builder. Ct. Salisbury. Pet. Aug. 23. Order, Aug. 23
ATKINSON, ALFRED, Knaresborough, commission agent. Ct. York. Pet. Aug. 25. Order,
Aug. 25.

BLACKBOROW, EDWIN BAILEY, Newport, wine merchant. Ct. Newport, Mon. Pet. Aug. 9.
Order, Aug. 27.

CROW, GEORGE, Canterbury, builder. Ct. Canterbury. Pet. Aug. 26. Order, Aug. 26.
DAWSON, ALFRED THOMAS, Great Grimsby, manure merchant. Ct. Great Grimsby. Pet. Aug. $.
Order, Aug. 25.

DAIMPRE, ISIDORE, Colebrook, clerk in holy orders. Ct. Exeter. Pet. Aug. 11. Order, Aug. %.
FORD, JAMES WILLIAM, Cheltenham, licensed victualler. Ct. Cheltenham. Pet. Aug. 25. Order,
Aug. 25.
GRIFFITHS, WILLIAM, Dafen, butcher. Ct. Carmarthen. Pet. Aug. 26. Order. Aug. 26.
HARRISON, THOMAS, Holderness, farmer. Ct. Kingston-upon-Hull. Pet. Aug. 15. Order, Aug. 2.
JOHNSTON, MARY DIXON, Turton, domestic servant. Ct. Bolton. Pet. Aug. 14. Order, Aug. 25.

« EelmineJätka »