« EelmineJätka »
ornament. At the same time, however, while he Sir WILLIAN BODKIN has resigned the office of
COPYHOLD PRACTICE. – A. by will devised should be glad to support the suggestions by all Assistant-Judge of the Middlesex Sessions. The
real estate, part of which was copyhold fine certain, to
his wife B. absolutely. After his death, B., by her the means in his power, he thought they should appointment is worth £1500 a year. not forget that the new courts and the restoration A MANCHESTER paper states that the borough sale, with the usual power of appointment, in order to
will, devised such copyholds to a trustee for imme liate of the old hall were completed during the chair of Stockport has twenty-six magistrates and disponse with the trustee's admission. On B.'s death manship of Lord Eversley, and he trusted, there. twenty-eight policemen.
the estate has been sold, and as I am acting both for fore, that his portrait, to be hung in that chamber, The post of high constable of the City of West- the vendor and purchaser, I shall be glad to be informed would form part of the scheme suggested by Mr. minster has become vacant by the death, at the
if it is necessary to take any and what steps to perfect Portal. He was not prepared with a motion on
the trustee's title before passing the estate by bargain age of seventy-five, of Mr. Foster Owen, who the subject now, but, with the permission of held it many years.
and sale, and as to the rights of the lord and steward of
the manor under the circumstances. the court, he hoped to bring it forward again next
DEPUTY STEWARD. sessions. The matter then dropped, but with a more advanced condition of the restoration a CORRESPONDENCE OF THE
Answers. county committee will probably be formed to carry out the object in view.
(Q. 44.) LEGATEE-DUTY.-On re-consideration, I
think that C. D., whether beneficially entitled or not, THE IRISH Law COURTS.- The Dublin Evening
“If one gives goods or chattels to an. Mail suggests that the puisne judges should be
Note.-This Department of the Law TIMES being open to
other, and the devisee refuse it, by this means the employed regularly in performing their share of responsible for any opinions or statements contained in it devise is become void, and any waiver or refusal will the work of the after-sittings. It is suggested,
suffice in this case, for a man shall not be compelled also, that the constitution of the Court for Land
nolens volens to take anything devised to him." See
THE PROFESSION.-I observe in your impres. Sheppard's Touchstone, 452 ; also 3 Prestou's Abstracts, Cases Reserved should be altered, and that a rota of judges should be formed to supply one to sit wished for amalgamation of the two branches of sion of Saturday last some remarks relative to the 104. Of course, if there be a valid disclaimer, C. D.
would not pay duty.
Z. Y. regularly in the Court of Appeal in Chancery to the Legal Profession. It happens that this subprovide against the evil consequences of the fre.
(Q. 45.) FEE FOR SEARCH. The superintendent quent divisions between the ordinary judges, where, and as I know something of the actual ject has been much discussed of late years else
registrar charges ls for compiling the index, and this
whether the date is known or not. à suggestion which seems to merit considera- working of the proposed system, where it has tion. The Town Council of Liverpool have just decided will not be out of place. The question referred been adopted, a few observations on the subject (Q. 48.) PRACTICE-COVENANT FOR PRODUCTION OF
DEEDS.-A. is entitled to a covenant of indemnity from to raise the salaries of their officers, from the to, has in fact been under discussion in several
C. Lord St. Leonards' opinion to this effect is re-stated deputy town clerk downwards; the total increase
without dissent, Dart, V. & P. 618, 4th edit. Z. Y. in salaries amounts to £2000 annually. This is a
of the colonies, and very recently an endeavour step in the right direction, and we commend this to bring about the desired change.
was made in New South Wales and Queensland
(Q. 52.) PARTNERSHIP.-Smith's ground of complaint authorities with a view to an increase of the salary have been expected, meeting with considerable decision to the consideration of other municipal failed in both instances, the measure, as might fif any) is much slighter than that of the plaintiff in
v 34 , dissolution, of town clerks.
each partner was held entitled to use the style of the opposition from many of the members of the
firm. MESSRS. HENRY KIMBER and Charles Cydwellyn Colonial Bar.
In that case, as pointed out by Mr. Lindley
In New Zealand, however, the (Partnership, 888, note p. 3rd edit.), it might perhaps Ellis, of 79, Lombard-street, announce that they contemplated reform was actually accomplished have been argued that the use of the name of the firm have dissolved partnership, and in future each
years since, and I need hardly say by one member of the diseolved partnership would gentleman will conduct business on his own that the alteration has been found to work
expose the other member to some risk. Here the deaccount. The papers and documents of their respective clients will remain with the partner this country as solicitors have, after examination, well enough-in fact, gentlemen admitted in scription" lute Sinith and Howell” entirely obviates
any such difficulty. If Smith have any claim, it
must be a claim to have the good will sold and the under whose care the particular business has been been admitted as barristers and solicitors in New
Z. Y. carried on, unless they receive an intimation from Zealand, and have been quite as successful as
On the dissolution of a partnership 'each partner the client to the contrary. English barristers going to that colony.
has a right, in the absence of any stipulation to the The Supreme Court of Massachusetts has general rule, the only practical result of this state
contrary, to use the name of the old firm. Vide Williamso
Personal Property, 6th edit. p. 238 ; Banks v. Gibson again declared that by the statutes of the State of things is that, as all legal practitioners can be (M. R. 11 Jur. N. 8. 680; 31 L. J. 179, Chan.; 13 W. R. all wagers are void. The action was one for admitted as barristers and solicitors, a certain 1012).
Socius. money had and received against the party winning number of gentlemen, feeling themselves qualified the wager, which had, in good faith, been paid to to do so, devote themselves to advocacy, and the
(Q. '53.) RIGHT OF ACTION.-Tibbs could maintain him by the stakeholder. The presiding judge re
an action against Jinks for money had and received. If rest pursue the ordinary business of solicitors.
Jinks had killed the dog he would have been under no fused to admit evidence offered by the defendant Partnerships have, of course, been formed on this liability, having simply obeyed his master's orders, but tending to show that he had won the wager, basis. To those acquainted with colonial affairs, having gone out of his way to convert the dog into which, singularly enough, was upon the position it must be somewhat surprising to find that money, he is clearly liable to refund the £5 he received. of certain graves in a cemetery. English solicitors have so long submitted to the
The sale being entirely wrongful, Tibbs cannot COPYRIGHT LAW.-A correspondent in the existing monopoly. It is difficult indeed to see
maintain any action for the £5. He may, however, Atheraum suggests that to prevent disputes and why a branch of the Profession, the qualification
obtain trover for the setter dog against Jinks; or uncertainty, the registration of titles of books for membership in which until recently con- detinue (Jones v. Doule, 9 M. & W. 19.) He may also should be effected prior to publication, and that sisted in the eating of dinners, and the expen- maintain trover or detinue against Poucher, unless the the registration fee shall be reduced to one half. diture of so much cash, should be entitled to such dog was purchased bond fide and in market overt.
Z, Y. Also that an alphabetical register of titles, with privileges and pecuniary advantages as barristers the date of registration and name of the publisher, possess, over solicitors in this country. And
(Q.54.) MARRIED WOMEN'S PROPERTY Act.-It ap. should be kept open to an applicant upon pay. the curious part of the case is this-that whereas
pears to me that a deposit in a savings' bauk in the ment of 18.; the entry to be null and void at the the barrister pays no annual fee for the right to name of a married woman, if made prior to the 9th end of a year, to prevent any “phantom" title practise, the solicitor is burdened with the charge Auz. 1870, is not even prima facie ber separate estate, from incumbering the register. of £9 or £6 as the case may be. Legal reforms
In such a case sects. 2 and 9 have no application. 2. 1. A NEW CLAIMANT.-A claim to the title and still he remains in the same position, whilst the
are made, and the solicitor's profits cut down, but estates of the Earl of Eglinton came before the
(Q. 51.) PROCEDURE.--Gen. Rule 204 provides as fol. Sheriff Court of Chancery, Edinburgḥ, on Monday: profits and privileges intact. The Profession in
“gentlemen of the long robe
preserve their lows: “The place of sitting of each County Court in
matters of bankruptcy shall be the town in which the The claimant, Mr. Foulton, maintains that he is this country would do well to follow the example the common law business of the court, under the pro
court now holds, or may hereafter hold, its sittings for the great grandson of James Foulton, who was younger brother to the eleventh Earl of Eglinton. the courts of law and equity are amalgamated, as of New Zealand in this respect. In that colony
visions of the County Courts Act 1846." I have never Having eloped with one of his father's domestics, well as the two branches of the Profession. Why court other than where the proceedings are carried on:
heard of County Court judges hearing applications in a named Mary Wallace, whom he married, he was disowned by the family, enlisted as a soldier, and should not the same be done here ? Should this except in matters of arrest, when the bankrupt intends died in the service. His son, James Foulton,
happen, we should, I think, very soon see what leaving the country. This matter is of such urgency served in the navy, and the son of the latter, distinct branches. There can be little doubt but are the relative merits of the members of the two
that the warrant is sigued by the judge whenever the application is made.
Jus. Thomas Foulton, who was the father of the pre that the places of many of our "junior counsel”, sent claimant, again became a soldier. His son, the claimant also entered the army, and was pre- firms. We should see would soon be supplied by members of legal
LAW SOCIETIES. sent with the Light Brigade in the Balaklava before the court, briefs not left unread, but the
cases properly brought charge. Since he left the army he has lived in advocates fully in possession of all the facts of The adjourned meeting of this new society, the
LEGAL PRACTITIONERS' SOCIETY. Edinburgh, and has occupied himself in getting the cases in which they are concerned, and up evidence in support of his case. He
object of which is the reform of abuses in connechis great-grandmother had documentary evidence thereby enabled to do justice to the clients they
tion with the legal profession, was held last Wed. in her possession which would have proved him represent.
nesday evening at the rooms of the Social Seienco the heir to the title and estates. These docu.
Association, 1, Adam-street, Adelphi. ments were obtained from her by Robert, NOTES AND QUERIES ON
Mr. W. T. Charley, D.C.L., M.P., was called to sixth Baron of Skelmorlie, whose son Hugh became the twelfth Earl of Eglinton, under a
POINTS OF PRACTICE.
the chair, and there was a large attendance of
members. promise that he would look after the interests
Mr. Charles Ford (hon. secretary), read the of her son, who was then a minor. It is alleged, NOTICE.-We must remind our correspondents that this minutes of the last meeting, which were con. however, that he used the papers to obtain posses.
column is not open to questions involving points of law
firmed. He then stated that he had received sion of the estates for his own family. At any
be excluded which go beyond our limits.
numerous letters from all parts of the kingdom rate, his son married the danghter of the eleventh N.B.- None are inserted unless the name and address of the from members of the legal profession, in which Earl, who had no heirs male, and from him the writers are sent, not necessarily for publication, but as a
guarantee for bona fides.
they fully sympathised with the objects of the present Earl of Eglinton is lineally descended.
new society, and wished it every success. As an The case came before the court on an application for a commission and diligence to examine certain
instance of this he read the following extracts: Queries.
Mr. Copp (Essex-street, Strand): "I wish the title deeds. Mr. Blair, who appeared for the 55. LANDLORD AND TENANT-RENT.-A. lately sold present earl, said there was
society every success, and shall be happy to cono such deed in some property, the rent of which is payable yearly at Michaelmas. The day of settleinent was by the con.
operate with you and other members of the Pro. existence. Mr. Menzies, who appeared for the tract fixed for the 26th December last. Is not A.
fession who have taken such a warm interest in claimant, said he found there was such a deed by entitled to the quarter's rent accruing from Michael. the subject, in seeking to weed out from our ranks date and designation in a Crown charter in the mas to the day of settlement ? As the purchaser those who by their unprofessional, and in some Register House, and if such deed were not now in objects to pay the proportion, will not the course be for cases even nefarious practices, would seek to bring existence it must have been at one time. He would the vendor to wait till next Michaelmas; and then, if
the Profession into disrepute." take his chance of recovering it after diligence. the purchaser receives the whole year's rent, sue him for the proportion ? Does not The Apportionment Act
Mr. Charles E. Lewis, M.P. (Old Jewry): "The The sheriff ordered answers to be lodged in four1870 apply to cases between vendor and purchaser ?
objects of your proposed society appear to be to teen days.
AX ARTICLED CLERK, do the work which ought to be done by the
existing bodies. I fear that there is but little couple of sets of the notices which have been discipline was most lax. He thought that it prospect of rousing our profession into anything issued, and any other printed matter you may might be desirable to organise a deputation to the like real activity; and I have recently, as you have, I will canvass my friends with the view of Lord Chancellor to tender to him their desire to know, given a great deal of time and energy, getting them to join the society. You must of support in every way in their power his Bill (Hear), without much result, to try and accomplish this course be aware it is a difficult matter for solicitors and to bring under his notice the importance of I must leave others to do what they can in the as a body to attend meetings; bat I think if a re-organising the Inns of Court on the basis of same direction, but can only give my best wishes canvass by some of those interested were orga- having a representative body to govern the Bar, for success."
nised, much good might be done, and perhaps one There were many grievances which attorneys and Mr. J. T. Shapland (South Malton): “Will you of the principal objects of meetings accom- solicitors complained in connection with the Inne kindly give me some information respecting it plished.”
of Court. These could be mentioned to Lord Sel. (the society), as it appears to me from the little Mr. H. L. Turner (Newcastle-upon-Tyne).- borne. It was all the more necessary that they I have seen, that it is just such a society as we “From what I have heard of the society it seems should tender their support to the Lord Chan attorneys and solicitors require."
to me to be far more likely than any other to bene cellor, because, in the course of his speech, he said Mr. W.J. Wheatcroft (Eastbourne).-"My fear fit the Profession and look after the interests of that be was afraid that if he introduced his Bill is that the objects of the society are not suffi- of its members, which the Incorporated Law next session it would be made the groundwork of ciently extensive. The legal profession must use Society does not seem to trouble much about." a party attack against the Government, but they the influence in their own behalf, which, at Mr. R. A. Ward (Maidenhead).—“I highly could assure him that such would not be the case. general elections, they have so often used on approve of your Legal Praotitioners' Society. I The question about the representative body for behalf of their clients, if any great good is to be am desirous of joining the society, and if you can the government of the Bar would involve their done. Our branch of the Profession must have a send me any prospectuses should canvas my pro- consulting its members upon the subjeot. A share of the plums which the higher branch at fessional brethren.”
memorial to the Lord Chancellor should be subpresent monopolise, and this, I believe, can only Mr. H. Symonds (Dorchester).-“ Please to mitted to the Bar, especially to its junior mem. be done through combined influence at the time of enrol me as a member of Legal Practitioners' bers. Thus, by means of their Bill, their memoa general election. There is much however, for Society. I hope something may be done towards rial, and their deputation, they would bring the the proposed society to accomplish, and I will do facilitating the change from solicitor to barrister. society very prominently under the notice of the what I can to aid it.”
It is unfair to have to pass a preliminary and read | Profession and the public, and would acquire both Mr. C. R. Gibson (Dartford).-"I thank you for for three years after having been in the legal Pro. moral and numerical strength. (Loud cheers.) the printed circular. I am very willing to do any. fession for some years.".
The hon, secretary (Mr. Ford) then read a draft thing I can to advance the interests of our Pro- Mr. J. Borough (Derby), -"One of the main of the proposed rules which he had prepared. fession, and if I can I will attend your meeting, grievances of my branch of the Profession which Mr. Holroyd Chaplin proposed that the rules be and learn whether the present movement at all I hope to see removed is our exclusion from the referred to a sub-committee of five, three to form embraces the objects which I venture to think are Inns of Court. Though not objecting to a certain a quorum, comprised of members of the society, so essential for the welfare of the Profession at interval (say two or three terms) between removal and that those rules be presented, with the suglarge."
from the Rolls and being called to the Bar, I gested alterations, at the next meeting, to be fully Mr. Wm. Gresham (High Bailiff of Southwark). think it anjust and unwise on the part of those discussed, which was carried unanimously. -"I vastly approve of your circalar just come to venerable societies to refuse us permission to It was then proposed and carried that the fol hand. Pray put me down as an annual subscriber. enter as students or members. I feel sure that lowing geatlemen should serve on this committee : I shall be happy in any other mode to support the the removal of this restriction would tend as much Messrs. Charley, Jencken, Chaplin, Ford, and views of the society. My son, Thos. Gresham, to the benefit of the Bar as of ourselves, and Delamar. who is my partner here, desires to do the same.' would greatly increase the incomes of the Inns. A Mr. F. A. Rowland moved and Mr. Gresham
Mr. E. James (Eastbourne).—“I have perused powerful body, supporters of the present privi. seconded a motion to the effect that Mr. Charley the circular you were kind enough to hand me leges of the Inns, would also be created. I should should be appointed treasurer, which was also respecting the formation of a new society, under be very sorry to see the constitution of the Inns carried. the title of the 'Legal Practitioners' Society,' of Court altered, or their powers over the Profes. A like resolution was adopted requesting Mr. and beg to say, that as a gentleman who has sion interfered with in any way, and I advocate Charles Ford to continue his duties as hon. secrepassed and is about to be admitted, I consider the slight relaxation of the rules which I have tary. such a society very much needed in order to pro- mentioned as a truly conservative measure. The The chairman then brought forward the subject tect the interests of the Profession, which at the revival and extension of the Inns of Chancery of the desirability of protecting the public against present time are so much trespassed upon by mere might also be taken in hand by your society with the money lenders, quacks, and agents of all kinds outsiders."
advantage to the general body of attorneys and which were the bane of the Profession. Mr. W. Cheesman (Eastbourne).-"I shall be solicitors. I should say that I am strongly Mr. Gresham, in speaking to this subject, said glad if you will kindly add my name as a member opposed to any amalgamation of the two branches it was a matter of common notoriety in the Proof the Legal Practitioners' Society,' of whose of the Profession."
fession that many men were in the habit of lending utility there cannot be a second opinion.”
The hon. secretary also read numerous other their names. The Incorporated Law Socioty had Mr. C. Matthews (Eastbourne). -"My attention extracts from the letters of solicitors who had undertaken to remedy many of the evils com. having been called to a new society, called the joined the society,
plained of, but without much good resulting. It Legal Practitioners' Society, and having read over The Chairman said that this meeting, as they was not, he thought, so much the result of legisthe prospectus, I cordially approve of its objects. were aware, was an adjourned meeting of the lative power as the way of checking the practice In the course of my twelve years' experience in Legal Practitioners' Society. At the last meeting in some way which would do the most good. the Profession, I have frequently known great it was decided that this society should be estab. Mr. Lowo said that he came constantly in con. misery and hardship inflicted upon the poorer lished. They were now met to frame the rules for tact with those persons who assumed the liberty classes, who have entrusted small matters to the society and to start it on its career of useful- to practise who had not the ability or the right so agents, and who have invariably managed, some- ness to the Profession, and, he trusted, to the to do. Personally he had never taken objection how or another, to plunder their victims more or public at large. Draft rules would be placed to any man who had appeared from a bonü fide less. I shall be happy to become a member, and before them and they would be discussed seriatim. office; but there were men who had been clerks I wish the society every success in its praise- The next point would be to make
to auctioneers who frequently conducted cases, worthy efforts.”
two appointments under those rules. About armed with a letter duly signed by some solicitor, Mr. T. Marshall (Leeds.)—“I have received sixty gentlemen had signified their intertion this occurring time after time. He himself could the circulars of the Legal Practitioners' Society, of joining the society; but he thought they name twenty persons whose certificates were taken wbich you have kindly sent me. I should be would agree that they had not as yet sufficient out by subscription (laughter), who were either obliged by your answering the following queries : material from which to select their governing bedridden or what not, whose names were kept 1. By what authority the proposed code of eti- body. Correspondence, however, must be carried upon the Law List simply for the purpose of guette is to be enforced. 2. Whether the rights on, and receipts given for subscriptions, and it enabling robbers (if he might use the word), to and liabilities of the two branches of the legal was therefore necessary that an honorary trea. prey upon the public, and the testimony of vari. profession sought to be defined are the existing surer, &c., and honorary secretary should be ap
ous metropolitan magistrates would, he was rights and liabilities, and no others. 3. Whether pointed. The next point was the consideration of assured, fully bear him out in his assertion. The placing the government of the legal profession on the most suitable subject for legislation next ses- thing was perfectly scandalous. As a remedy, he à sound representative basis implies that the sion. It would be remembered that at the last proposed that when a practitioner found a person authority of the Benchers of the various Inns of meeting there was a general concurrence of opinion who was perfectly unknown to him, conducting a Court to disbar members of the Bar, and of the that the subject, which was the most pressing and case, he would suggest that the magistrate's clerk judges to strike off the rolls attorneys and solici- the most ripe for legislation, was the protection should inquire into his antecedents, and if they citors, is to be taken from them and vested in a of the legal Profession against the encroachments were not satisfactory the magistrate should refuso governing body elected by the Profession at of unqualified persons. (Hear, hear.) He gathered to hear him. large, or what else the prospectus does mean. 4. from the manner in which they received that Mr. J. Seymour Salaman said that, being a Whether the protection of the legal profession statement that they would agree in thinking that momber of the Incorporated Law Society, he had from the depredations of unqualified men means the time had come when legislation upon that ques. long seen considerable apathy in many questions farther restrictive legislation, or merely the tion should be initiated. The next thing would be affecting the legal Profession, and there was no establishment of a means for reforming the exist. the appointment of a sub-committee to frame a doubt but that the Incorporated Law Society had ing laws which protect us.
Bill upon the subject. Since they last met a very failed to do its duty. With regard to the Legal Mr. W. Duignan (Walsall).—“I do not feel important speech had been delivered by the Lord Practitioners' Society many of its objects he fully interested in any question except the amalgama- Chancellor to a deputation of the Legal Education concurred in, and it would he, he was of opinion, tion of barristers and solicitors, and I think it Association, in the course of which his Lordship instrumental in doing good to the Profession; idle to redress small grievances, leaving the great announced that he was prepared io introduce a and he would give it every support in his power. ones untouched. I do not think, therefore, that bill into Parliament to re-organise the Inns of Mr. Webster thought that the question of dealI can take any interest in the objects of the Court. This re-organisation was a subject matter ing with the quacks of the Profession was a very Society. I am, nevertheless, exceedingly obliged of which they could very well take cognizance and important one. He suggested that an amendment for your courteous note."
tender to the Lord Chancellor their support to the of the Stamp Act would be serviceable, so as to Mr. J. E. Mason (Alford).-" I shall be glad if Bill, provided it/was a fairland reasonable one and punish them. Auctioneers and accountants to you will add my name to the list of members. The one which the legal Profession had a right to the Court of Chancery being the worst of these vis inertia of the · Incorporated' and the ' Inland expect from so eminent a man as Lord Selborne. quacks. For an infringement of laws of this deRevenue' to be overcome, in forcing either to deal There were several points in connection with the scription, every unqualified person should be sent with unqualified persons, I found to be almost past Inns of Court which required legislating upon. to prison; and this matter should he thought, belief during three years' service as secretary to It was very important that the Bar should be have the attention of the society directed to it. the Plymouth Law Society, since incorporated. I governed by a representative body. The Benchers Dr. Tompkins, D.C.L., was of opinion that, in trust the projected society may be more success.
were practically the nominees of the Lord Chan. dealing with matters of the description urged by ful than I was.”
cellor for the time being. In Paris the advocates previous speakers, it was necessary to take a Mr. W. Merrick (old Jewry).—“In common were governed by a representative body, and their broad view of the question. They were on the eve with many others I approve the objects of this discipline was most exact; in England the Bar of great changes, and that in regard to the society; and if you will kindly forward me a was governed by an irresponsible body, and its administration of justice the time had come when
the two branches of the Profession were proposed honorary secretary of the Legal Practitioners
NEW TRIAL PAPER, to be amalgamated, and it was necessary to know Society, to say that numerous communications on
For Judgment. whether this fusion would be for the public good. the subject of the society which he has received Searle v. Laverick The better course, he thought, was to have an from solicitors since the commencement of the
For Argument. appointed committee to inquire into the matter; present year, he has been obliged to leave un.
Moved Michaelmas Term, 1872. and if they could get annual committees of the answered owing to pressure, and the number of London-Ionides v. Pender and another (part heard) Bar, appointed by the different Inns of Court, and suoh letters, and we are requested to add that the Bristol-London and South-Western Bank v. Williams
(Hannen, J.-Mr Butt composed of attorneys and solicitors, they might information in most cases asked for can be fully
[Mellor, J.-Mr Lopes hold & conference wherein the questions with ascertained by a perusal of the above roport of the
Voved Hilary Term, 1873. regard to the duties and relations of the two meeting of the society.-Ed.]
MIDDLESEX-Angel v. Collins branches of the Profession might be discussed.
[Mellor, J.-Mr M. Chambers In the duty they owed to society and to the
LONDON-Parker v. The Imperial Royal Azienda Co.
HULL LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.
(L. C. J.-Mr Day Library, Parliament-street, on Tuesday evening
[L. C. J.-Sir J. Karslake Mr. Holroyd Chaplin said that they did not last. Henry Cook, Esq., the president, occupied LONDON-Corry. Patton [L. C. J.-Mr Matthews know what the feeling in the House of Commons the chair. J. T. Woodhouse, Esq., solicitor, read
MANCHESTER-Taylor v. Greenhaigh would be regarding their proposed course of
[Mellor, J.-Mr Pope a paper on the “Judicature Act 1873," after MANCHESTER-Pendlebury v. Same action, nor did they know what feeling the press which a discussion took place on certain parts had towards them. He thought that there would be of the Act, in which J. Cook, Esq., Mr. A. M. MANCHESTER-Pearson v. Johnson and another
(Mellor, J.-Mr Pope a great outcry about free trade in law, and he Jackson, and the president took part. A vote of
[Mellor, J.-MT Pope would recommend
that they should endeavour to thanks was passed to Mr. Woodhouse for his LIBERPOOL Batchelor v. Lancashire and worksbica enforce the existing acts before legislating
, Mr Herschell paper, and to the president for presiding, and the further.
Tried during Term. meeting adjourned. Mr. Jencken, barrister, considered that in the
MIDDLESEX-Smith v. Palmer [Lush, J.-Mr Salter
MIDDLESEX-Tuson v. Parkbouse absence of any knowledge on the subject, it was
(Lush, J.-Mr Day
MIDDLESEX-Scott v. The London General Omnibns difficult to discuss the queetion, the principal SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION.
(Lush, J.-Mr Giffard point being the repression of outsiders. The The usual monthly meeting of the board of di.
Moved Easter Term, 1873. most important question was to find out how the rectors of this association was held on Wednesday MIDDLESEX-Barnaby v. Earl [L. C. J.-Mr Garth law stood in relation to this subject, so that they last, the 7th inst., at the Law Institution, London. London-Dean v. Stokes [L. C. J.-Mr D. Seymour should know properly how they stood.
Mr. Park Nelson in the chair ; the other directors MIDDLK8BX-Toole v. Young [L. C. J.-- Sir J. Kürslake Mr. J. S. Salaman was fully aware of the present being Messrs. Brook, Burton, Hedger, London-Lazard v. Javal [Mellor, J.-Mr Day enormous number of quacks in the Profession, Rickman, Smith, Styan, and Torr: Mr. Eiffe,
LONDON-Die Elbinger v. Armstrong
[Lush, J.-Attorney.General complaints of them having frequently been made secretary. A sum of £122 was distributed in LONDON-Kennard v. Payne (Quain, J.-Mr Murphy in the Law TIMES ; but, whilst being aware of grants of assistance to the families of three de- KENT-Harvey v. Lewis
[L.C.J.-Mr Biron this, he thought that in a society so young as the ceased solicitors ; eleven new members were SURREY-Bawden v. English present one, it was a little too premature to pre- admitted to the association. A communication
[Brett, J.-Mr Serjt. Ballantino
NEWCASTLE-Robinson v. River Wear Commissioners pare a Bill to Parliament, having for its object from the Lord Chancellor was read, stating that
[Archibald, J.-Mr Herschell the dealing with these outsiders. With regard to his Lordship would be happy to preside at the DURHAM-North-Eastern Railway Company v. Bowmın the practitioners in the Court of Bankruptcy, the ensuing anniversary festival of the association in
[Pollock, B.-Mr Holker members of this society should first read the June next; and other general business was trans- DURHAY-Oliver v. North-Eastern Railway Company existing law on the subject, and then act accord. acted.
[Pollock, B.- Mi Holker ingly. They were not quite prepared that evening,
LIVERPOOL-Siven v. Heineman he thought, to discuss what form the proposed ARTICLED CLERKS' SOCIETY.
[Archibald, J.-Mr Herschell
LIVERPOOL-Doughty v. Milnourn Bill should take, and he would suggest that the A MEETING of this society was held at Clement's
[Archibald, J.-Mr C, Russell matter for the present be deferred.° °If such a Bill Inn Hall on Wednesday, the 7th Jan. Mr. S. LIVERPOOL-Sidley o. Longriga was proved to be absolutely necessary, he did Chester in the chair. Mr. Castle opeued the sub
[Archibald, J.-Mr R. G. Williams not think it could be placed in better hands than ject for the evening's debate, viz. : “ That the NortINGHAM-Topham v. Bettney the chairman's. (Applause.) general powers of licensing are not satisfactorily Nottinghax-Clayton v. Stapleford Colliers Company
(Denman, J.--Yr Field The Chairman said that there must be some exercised by magistrates. The motion was car.
[Denman. J.-Mr D Seymour thing definite done if they wanted to be practical, ried by a majority of one.
Lincoln-Howell v. Copland [Bovill, L.C.J.---Mi Fic!! and they must not be content with only talking
LEED-Hirst v. Roebuck [Bovill, L.C.J.-Mr Junisty over these matters.
LEEDS-Sneesley v. Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Mr. Wingfield referred at length to what he PROMOTIONS AND APPOINT-LEED3--Sturdy v. Sanderson
[Bovill, L.C.J.-Mr Field
[Denman, J.-Mr Field oalled old grievances of the law stationers taking
LEED8-Reg. v. Inhabitants of Bradfield the bread from the mouth of the legal practi.
[Denman, J.-Mr Field tioner. There was, he considered, quite sufficient N.Bonouncements of promotions being in the nature
of advertisements, are charged 2s.6d, each, for which
LEEDS-Same v. Same
(Denman, J.-Mr Field law to prevent this if it were put into force.
postage stampatahould be inclosed.
DEVON-Bentney v. Lumbard Mr. F. A. A. Rowland then proposed, and Mr.
[Pigott, B.-Mr H. T. Cole
Tried during Term. Webster seconded, a resolution to the effect that The Right Hon. Sir John Duke Coleridge, Knt., MIDDLESEX-Cooke v. Goodman (Quain, J.-Mr Holl a sub.committee be appointed, with the view of Lord Chief Justice of Her Majesty's Court of MIDDLESEX-Bridges v. Barnsley considering whether it was necessary to initiate Common Pleas, has appointed Mr. Robert William
Pigott, B.-Mr Bullen legislation upon the subject of quacks and other Litchfield, of Newcastle, Staffordshire, solicitor, MIDDLESEX-Heywood v. Pickering banes of the Profession ; the sub-committee being to be a Commissioner for taking acknowledgments
[Pigott, B.-U: H. T. Co’e Dr. Tompkins, Messrs. Charley Mantell, Rowland, of Deeds of Married Women, under the Fines and MIDDLESEX-Waddell r. Woltfe
[Pigott, P.-MH, T. Coie Salaman, Webster, and C. Ford. Recoveries Act, for the county of Yorkshire.
Moved Trinity Term, 1873. The Chairman, in bringing forward the subject The Right Hon. Sir John Duke Coleridge, Knt., MIDDLESEX-Doulton v. Timms of the representative governing body of the Bar, Lord Chief Justice of Her Majesty's Court of
(Bramwell, B.-Mr Day said that it would be as well to have a memorial Common Pleas, bas appointed Mr. Basil Edmund
Tried during Term. prepared, to be signed by the junior members of Greenfield, of Guildford, Surrey, to take affidavits
MIDDLESEX-Finigau o. Fraser the Bar.
[Bramwell, B.--Mr C. Rilssell The proposed representative body in the Court of Common Pleas.
MIDDLESEX-Block v. Pigott [Pigott, B.-Mr Pearü would be one in whom the Bar had confidence.
Moved Michaelmas Term, 1873, He was sure that Sir William Harcourt would
MIDDLESEX-Raper v. The London General Omnibus help them, and he had no doubt but that Lord THE COURTS AND COURT
[Quain, J.-Mr Day Selborne would also. The object would be the
MIDDLESEX-Kirkstall Browery Company v. Furness formation of a body to whom the calling of the
(Denman, J.-Yr. Price Bar would be entrusted, and who would have the SITTINGS AND CAUSE LIST IN AND AFTER
LONDON -Dudgeon v. Pembroke
[Blackburn, J.-Sir J. Karslake general management of the Inns of Court.
LONDON-Irlande v. Lavery (Quain, J.-Mr. Holser Mr. Wingfield moved, Mr. Maloney seconded,
DULHAN-Lambert v. Madgshon and a proposition was carried to this effect.
(Quain, J.-Mr. Herschell. Mr. c. Ford said it was a most important
Common Law Courts.
NEWCASTLE–Turnbull v. Murray matter that a deputation should be formed with.
(Brett, J.-Mr. Herschell out delay, to wait on the Lord Chancellor. Indeed,
Court of Queen's Bench,
NORTHUMBERLAND-Rog. v. The Inbabitants of Alnwick
[Quain, J.-Mr. Herschell he thought that it was of the first importance, and
SITTINGS AT NIşi PRIUS-IN TERX.
CUMBERLAND-Sloan v. Holliday that there could not be any possible ovil, but much
(Quain, J.-Mr Herschell good likely to arise from this course. Relative to Tuesday
Jan. 13 | Monday .............. Jan. 26 LANCASTER-Taylor v. Rushton (Quain, J.-Yr Holker the question of the modification of the present Monday
LIVERPOOL-Stephenson v. Corporation of Liverpool rules, practically preventing solicitors from No London sittings this Term.
(Quain, J.-Mr. C. Russell
LIVERPOOL-Jefferson v. Querner changing to the other branch, the Lord Chancellor,
(Quain, J.-Mr. C. Russell he said, had written him a letter, from which he
LIVERPOOL-Ashcroft v. Crow Orchard Colliery Comgathered that he was favourable to a modification
Feb. 2 | Monday
[Quain, J.-Mr. Herschell of the coneolidated regulations upon the subject,
SITTINGS IN Banco.
LIVERPOOL-Francis and Company v. Eastwood and Sir George Jessel and the Lord Chief Justice Monday .........Jan. 12 Motions and new trials
[Brett, J.-Mr. C. Russell Tuesduy
13 Ditto of the Court of Common Pleas, and other eminent Wednesday
MONMOUTI-Pitman v. Williams 14 Ditto
[Archibald, J.-Mr Bosanquet men were also interested in the question; and he Thursday
Devon-Mears v. Evans (L. C. B.-Mr H. T. Colo trusted that the worthy chairman would too, Friday
16 Special paper
CORNWALL-Tenby v. Rule [L. C. B.-Mr Collins interest himself in it. Mr. Ford said he had re
CORNWALL-Pender v. Hicks [L. C. B.-Mr Kingdon Monday ceived many letters from distinguished members
19 Enlarged rules, motions, and BRISTOL-Ayles v. Maidment (L. C. B.-Mr Lopes of the Bar on the subject.
BRISTOL-Same v. Same [L. C. B.-Mr H.T. Cole Tuesday 20 Special paper
BRISTOL-Tasker t. Fielder (L. C. B.-Mr Pridcard It was then arranged that the secretary should Wednesday 21* Motions, new trials, and Crowa HERTFORD-Chapman v. Lapworth be authorised to communicate with the Lord
[Martin, B.-Mr J. Brom Chancellor relative to the reception of the deputa. Thursday
22 Motions and new trials
SURREY-Chasemore v. Turner
(Martin B.-Mr Garth tion on the several points which had engaged the
SJRBEY-Kavanagh v. Kerkbam (Martin, B.-Yr Da
24 Crown paper attention of the meeting; and that a circular Monday
SURREY-Mare v. Rony Martin, B. - Hon. A. Thoriyer
26 Motions and new trials should be sent round to the Profession, setting Tuesday
SURREY- Pearson v. Lawson, S. & N. Co. 27 Special paper
[Pigott, B.-Mr Murphy forth the objects of the society.
SURREY-Nicholls v. Chamberg
(l'igott, B.-Mr W. Williams Charley for presiding, which terminated the pro.
SURREY-Coyte v. Elptrick [Pigott. B.-Mr C. W.Wood
31 Ditto ceedings.
LEED8-Marks v. Hick [Pollock, B.-Mr D. Seymour * On these days the Court of Queen's Bench will sit (We are requested by Mr. Charles Ford, the 'in two divisions, when motions are excluded.
Tried during Term.
MIDDLESEX-Dalrymple v. Low [Pigott, B.-Mr Popo | WARWICK-Same v, The Great Western Railway Com. Dauney v. Chatterton
Oleaga v. Castellain. Demurrer [Pollock, B.-Mr Herschell DEVON-Halse v. Halder
Harper v. Dewey. Appeal MIDLLESEX-Lapage v. Kert
SUSSEI-Reg. v. The Visiting Justices of Lewes County Lindsay v. Dale. Demurrer
Windus v. Flight. Dernurrer
Caffin v. Lloyd. Special case
Thursday, Jan. 22. SOUTHAMPTON— Peninsula and Oriental Steam Company | Uttley v. Todmorden Local Board. Demurrer SPECIAL PAPER,
Lovesy v. Stallard. Appeal
Pope v. Tearle. Appeal
Mavro v. Ocean Marine Insurance Company. Special
Court of Common Pleas.
Storey t. Rawlings. Demurrer Cope v. Scott. Demurrer
SITTINGS AT NISI PRIUS-IN TERM.
Same v. Kidsun, Demurrer Musgrave v. Inclosure Commissioners for England and
Middlesex. Wales. Special case
Monday, Jan. 26. Jones . The Menai Company. Special case
Tuesday .............. Jan. 13 | Monday
................ Jan. 26 Wills v. Cohen. Appeal
Court of Exchequer.
No London sittings this Term.
SITTINGS AT NISI PRIUS-IN TERM. Benevolent Association. Appeal
Middlesex. Wall v. The City of London Real Property Company.
Jan, 13 | Monday ...... Jan, 26 Special case.
19 Prince v. Esans. Appeal
SITTINGS IN BANCO.*
No London sittings this Term.
London. Tayler v. The Great Eastern Railway Company. Appeal
Feb. 16 London and Provincial Bank v. Roberts. Demurrer
SITTINGS IN BANCO.*
Jan. 12 Motions per new trials 19 Special paper Monday
13 Per motions and new trials Mid-Wales Railway Company v. Cambrian Railway
20 Motions and new trials Tuesday
14 Motions and new trials Company. Special case
15 Ditto Jefferson v. Querner. Demurrer
17 Ditto Leatham v, Bank. Appeal
19 Special paper Coyte v. Elptrick. Demurrer
20 Motions and new trials
21 Special paper
22 Motions and new trials Dudgeon v. Pembroke. Demurrer
24 Ditto Grant r. Budd. Demurrer
26 Special paper Cox v. Leigh. Special case • The Court of Common Pleas will, when convenient, Tuesday
27 Motions and new trials Lane v. Hanbury. Demurrer sit in two divisions.
28 Ditto Isparidi r. Watts. Demurrer
NEW TRIAL PAPER.
29 Ditto Friday
30 Ditto Brunninghans v. Manchester, Sheffield, and Liverpool
Enlarged Rules. Railway Cempany. Demurrer
31 Ditto Quartley v. Timmins Ianaridi . Watts. Demurrer
* The Court of Exchequer will, when convenient, sit Parisot v. Palmer Wood r. May. Appeal
in two divisions. Re an Attorney (Ex parte Rayment) and others Joseph v. Holroyd. Demurrer
PEREMPTONY PAPER. Walsh v. Walley. Appeal
To be called on the first day of Term after Motions, Edmonds v. Alsop Stanton u. Nourse. Demurrer
and to be proceeded with the next day, if necessary, Green r. Reade. Appeal Miller v. David
Lord v. Price
[Mr. Cohen-Mr. Myburgh-Mr. Gully
NEW TRIAL PAPER. Emanuel v. Bridger
Moved Easter Term, 1873.
Nathanson v. Haarblecher
(Brett, J.-Sir J. Karslake
Rees v. Forbes Cooper v. Mr. T. Salter, Mr. Michael Sutcliffe, Mr. LONDON-Lyle v. Wormacott idemurrer to argued with
Moved Michaelmas Term, 1872.
LONDON-Freeth v. Burr
[Mr. Hawkins, Q.C.-Mr. Garth
[Brett, J.-Mr Thesiger
Moved Easter Term, 1873. Vestry of St. Mary's, Islington v. Barrett
(Denman, J.-Mr Giffard | MonYOUTH-Evans v. The Newport Dry Dock Co. LONDON -Miles v. Lowman [Denman, J.-Mr Willis
(Honyman, J.-Ur. H. Matthews. For Argument. LONDON-Dothie v. Daw
Stand over. MIDDLESEX-Reg. v. Tbe Guardians of Stepney Union
(Denman, J.-Mr Serjt. Robinson NORFOLK-Same v. Middle Level Commissioners
Moved Michaelmas Term, 1873.
Moved Trinity Term, 1873.
MIDDLESEX-Wilson v. The Metropolitan Railway Com.
рзу CAMBRIDGE-Bowers v. Banyard MIDDLESEX-Benjamin v. Storr
[Bramwell, B.-Mr Garth
LUNDUX-Mason v. Colby CAMBRIDGE-Reg. v. Overseers of Haslingfield
[Hodyman, J.-Mr Torr
(L. C. B.--Mr Giffard WABWICK-Reg. v. Church wardens of Sutton Coldfela MIDDLESEX-Magee v. Lavell Hooyman, J.-Mr Colo
WINCHESTER-Jenvey v. Styring
[F. Stephens, Q.C.- Mr Collins WARWICE-Reg. v. Church wardens of Parish of Aston
Moved Michaelmas Term, 1873.
EIETER-Browse v. Badocock (L. C. B.-Mr H. T. Cole and Assessment Committee of Aston Union MIDDLESEX-Hammoud v. Vestry of St. Pancrag
BODMIN-Mill v. Hawker (L. C. B.-Mr H, T. Cole Beeks-Harding v. Headington
[Bovill, L. C. J.-The Attorney General
BRISTOL-Everett v. Wilkins (L. C. B.-Mr Lopes BEDFORD-Reg. o. The London and North-Western MIDDLESEX-WELLER v. London, Brighton, and South LEWES-Cook v. Osborne Railway Company
[Pigott, B.-Mr Day Coast Railway [Borill, L. C. J.-Mr D. Soymour CROYDON -Cave v. Waterer [Martin, B.-Mr Willis BEDFORD-Same .. Same MIDDLESEX-Mansell v. Clements
CROYDON-Gale v, Livermore [Pigott, B.-Mr Murphy LIVERPOOL-Liverpool Tramway Company v. Mayor,
[Denman, J.-Mr Griffiths CROYDON-Same v. Same (Pigott, B.-Mr Willis &c., of Borough of Liverpool MIDDLESEX-McLachlan v. Brain
AYLESBURY-Phipps v. Great Western Railway Com. YORK-Gallimore v. Goodall
(Honyman, J.-Mr Barnard
[Cleasby, B.-Mr Bulver CAENARVON-Owen v. Parsons and Roberts MIDLESEX-Kelly v. Patterson
BEDFORD-Woodroffe v. Davison STAFTORD-Reg. v. Blackburn
[Honyman, J.-Mr M. Moir
(Cleagby, B.-Mr Bulver DEYON-Mullins v. Collins LONDOX-Gunn v. Roberts
NORWICY-Makins v. London and North-Western Rail. CARDIGAN-Evans v. Smith
[Bovill, L. C. J.-Mr C. Russell
(Bramwell, B.-Mr Metcalfe YOex-Reg. t. Local Board for District of Oxhenhope LONDON-Applebee v. Percy
WARWICK-Vaughton r, Same (Honyman, J.-Mr Field BOLTOX-Wilson v. Cunlitfo
[Honyman, J.-Mr Willoughby LEEDS-Wood v. Wood [Pollock, B.-Mr D. Seymour WORCESTER-Maund v. Mason LONDON—Claridge v. Rumbolt
LEEDS-Harrison v. Londou and North-Western Rail. LIVERPOOL-Allen v. Church wardens of Liverpool
[Honyman, J.-Mr Grantham
[Pollock, B.-Mr D. Seymour KEST-Caballero v. Lewis
MANCHESTER—Johnson v. Appleby (Brett, J.-Mr Popo LEEDS-Priestly v. Dyson [Pollock, B.--Mr Field LANCASHIRE-Overseers of Bootle-cum-Linacre v. Clerk MANCHESTER-Abbott v. Bates (Quain, J.-Mr Herschell LEEDS-Simeon v. Dewburst [Pollock, B.--Mr Field of the Peace for Lancaster NOTTINGHAM-Smith v. Egington
LEEDS--Sawdon v. Andrew [Pollock, B.-Mr Field Kert-Redgrave v. Lee
(Honyman, J.-MT D. Seymour LEEDS,Naylor v. Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway LIVERPOOL Inman v. Derby Union
LEEDS-Brown v. Hall
[Pollock, B.-Mr Price
[Pollock, B.-Mr Field DEWSBOBY-Pitt v. Millar
BRISTOL-Green v. Heatley [L. C. B.-Mr H. T. Cole LEEDS-Ryder v. Jennings. [Pollock, B.-Mr. Compton SOMERSET-Ling v. Warry and others BRISTOL-Tudgay v. Sampson
Rutuix-Villiams v. Great Western Railway Company. MIDDLESEX - Reg. v. St. Leonard's Shoreditch
[Mr F. Stephens, Q.C.-Mr H. T. Cole
[Keating, J.-Mr M. Lloyd METROPOLITAN POLICE DISTRICT-Marwick v. Codlin BEDFORD--Millington v. Griffiths
DURHAM-Jackson v. Leeman. BOLTON-Cameron v. Foy
[Bramwell, B.-Mr O'Malley
(Quain, J.-Sir J. Karslake Boltox-Gaskell v. Bayley NORTHAMPTON-Hancock v. Plant
NEWCASTLE-Taylor v. Holland. BIRMINGHAM - Reg. 1. The Guardians of Worcester
[Bramwell, B.-Mr Merewether
LQuain, J.-Mr Herschell Union
CROYDON-Maggs r. Barnes (Pigott, B.- Mr Willis CARLISLE-Williamson v. Bain.
(Quain, J.-Mr Herschell CEKSHIRE-Reg, v. The Guardians of Runcorn
MANCHESTER–Nield v. London and North Western LANCASHIRE-Knight v. Halliwell
Railway Company. (Brett, J.-Mr Herschell BOLTON-Gaskell 7. Ormrod
LIVERPOOL-Bain v. Stanford and Levison. [Brett, J.ESSEI-Vance v. Wilson Monday, Jan. 19.–For Argument.
Mr. Holkor BRIGHTON-Duddell v. Black Phillips v. Millar. Special case
LIVERPOOL-Same v. Same. (Brett, J.-Mr Herschell STAFYOBD-Smart u. Pessoll Williams and a nother v. Heales. Special case
LIVERPOOL-Smalley v. Lancashire and Yorkshire Rail. GLAMORGAN-Davies v. Harvey
Lyle v. Wormacott.
Demurrer YORKEHIRE-Bateson v. Oddie
(To be Argued with Rule for New Trial.)
way Company. (Brett, J.-Mr Herschelt LANCASHIRE -Rideout v. Jenkinson Hendricks v. Australian Insurance Company. Special
LIVERPOOL-Radley v. London and North Western
Railway Company. [Brett, J.-Mr Herschell BrexisGHAM-Reg. v. The Guardians of Cheltenham
LIVERPOOL- Bamlet v. Picksley
(Quain, J.-Mr Aston
LIVERPOOL-Meck v. Pyman (Quain, J.-Mr Herschell
STAYYORD-Smith v. Bennett
(Denman, J.- Mr Huddleston Sussex-Same v. Same
Interests. Special case
STAFFORD-Moss v. London and North-Western and BRECENOCKSHIRE-Same v. The Guardians of Conway Bows v. Fenwick. Appeal
Great Western Railway Companies
(Denman, J.-Mr A. 8. Hill MIDDLESES—Same v. The Guardians of Norwich Incor. Colov. North Western Bank (Limited). Special cage
STAFFORD-Hiort v. Bott [Archibald, J.-Mr Huddleston poration
Thursday, Nov. 13.
Moved after 4th day of Michaelmas Term. ANGLESEY-Reg. v. Williams.
MIDDLESEX-Street v. The Society of Licensed VicEXETER-Same v. Sandford
tuallers Faulks v. Tremaro. Appeal
[Pollock, B.- Mr Tort DIRBY-Same v. The Treasurer of Matlock Turnpike Melhado r. P. A. and N. H. and B. Railway Company, MIDDLESEX-Trevitt v. Spick (Cleasby, B.--Mr Cave Trust Demurrer
MIDDLESEX-Toy v. Langton [Clensby, B.-Mr Finlay
ALMOND, CLARK, carpenter, Westow.rt, Upper Norwood. Pet.
Dec. 31. Jan. 20, at eleven, at the Temperance coffee house,
Westow.st, Upper Norwood Barrows v. Green
BARFIELD, SAMUEL, architectural sculptor, Leicester, and Niebuhr v. Kraushaar
Humberstone. Pet. Dec. 30. Jan. 15, at twelve, at offices of Spoor v. Green
Sol. Harvey, Leicester
BALLS, HAROLD GRIFFIN, currier, Cambridge. Pet. Dec. 31.
Jan. 16, at two, at office of Sols. Ellison and Burrows, Cam.
two, at office of Sol. Taylor, Preston
BEER, HERBERT EDWARD, wine merchant, Deal. Pet. Dec. 30. murrer. To stand over
Jan. 16, at one, ut office of Doyle and Edwards, Carey-st, Granville v. Finch. Special case. To be restated
Lincoln's inn. Sol. Dinux, Canterbury Whitehouse r. The Birmingham Canal Company. De
BELL, EDWARD, bricklayer. March. Pet. Deo, 30). Jan. 21, at murrer. To stand over
twelve, at the County Court house, March, Sul. Dawbarn, jun.,
March Sear v. Green. Demurrer. Part heard. To stand over
Biggy, CHARLES, builder, Charterhouse-la. Pet. Dec, 80, Jan Davis v. Webster. Demurrer, Part heard. To stand 29, At three, at office of Sol. Heathfield, Lincoln g.inn-fields over
BOWER, DAVID FARRER, iron manufac urer, Leeds. Pet. Dec. Hendry and another v. Dyke, Bart. Demurrer, TO
31. Jan. 15, at twelve, at otfica of Sol. Pullan, Leeds
BROWN, THOMAS, draper, Cheltenham. stand over
Jan. 19, at three, at
offices of Sol. Wheeler, Cheltenham Boden v. Levick. Demurrer. To stand over
BULLEY, WILLIAM THOMAS, carpenter, Great Yarmouth. Pet. Lloyd's Banking Company v. Blech. Demurrer. Το Dec. 29. Jan. 23, at twelve, at office or Blake, accountant, Great stand over
Yarmouth Sol. Palmer, Great Yarmouth
CHAWNER, JOHx. hosiery manufacturer, Leicester. Pet. Dec. Thorn v. Mayor of London
31. Jan, 27, at eleven, at office of Sols. Freer, Reers, and Moulv. Moul. Demurrer
DUNBORIN, RICHARD, ioiner, Warrington. Pet. Deo 31. Jan. 16, Copin v. Cressman
at three, at offices of Davies and Co., Warrington. Bols. Same v. Iarchow
Davien and Brook, Warrington Same v. Sevastapulo
ELLIS, JOIX, bootmaker, Liverpool. Pet. Dec. 29. Jan. 14, at Same v. Evans
three, at Gibson and Bolland, accountanta, 10, South John-st,
Liverpool. Sols. Harvey and A'rop, Liverpool
EVANS, DAVID MORIER, newspaper proprietor, Serjeant's-inn,
Fleet-st, Birchin.la, Finch la, and South Hackney. Pet. Dec. Same v. Adamson
90. Jan. 12, at the London tavern. Bishopsgate-st, in lieu of
the place originally named Same v. Same
EVANS, EDWIX, victualler, siough. Pet. Dec. 30. Jan. 14, at Same v. Strachan
three, at the Crown hotel, Slough. Sol, Froggatt, Argyll.st William v. Prothero. Special case
FAGG, GEORGE QUESTED, bootmaker, Holloway.rd. Pet. Dec. Laidlow v. Hastings Pier Company. Special case
18. Jan. 12, at two, at office of Sol, Vernede, Craven-st, Strand
GOODWIN, EDWARD MORTON, Architect, Ferryside. Pet. Dec. 27. Martin , Smith. Demurrer
Jan. 23, at twelve, at the Guildhall, Carmarthen, Sol, Soames, Blanchet v. Powell Llanwit Colleries Company. De- New.inn, Strand murrer
HADEN, JOHN, lamp manufactarer, Birmingham. Pet. Dec. 29. Shackleton v. Tindall. Demurrer
Jan. 13, at three, at offices of Sols. Wright and Marshall, Bir
Iningham Sorby v. Gordon. Special case
HAYDOCK, JOHN, draper. Blackburn. Pet. Deo. 31. Jan. 16, at Biddulph v. Bingham. Appeal
three, at offices of Sol. Darl-y, Blackburn Bain v. Stanford and Levison. Demurrer
HAYHURST, JOHN, victunller, Colne. Pet. Dec. 29. Jan. 20, at Same v. Same.
three, at office of Sols. Southern and Nowell, Burnley
HENSMAN, JOFIX, macuinigt. Ampthill. Pet, Dec. 24. Jan. 9, at * To stand over till issues in fact tried.
at four, at office of Sol. Stimson, Bedford
two, at office of Gibson, Newcastle. Sol. Pybus, jun., New.
HOWARD, DAVID, and BUCKLEY. JAMES HARROP, woollen manu.
Géorge hotel, Huddersfield, Sols. Messrs. Fox, Manchester
IVIMEY, EDWARD, tallor, Cornhill, and Newington causeway,
and Liverpool-rd, Islington. Pet. Dec. 19. Jan. 15, at two, at Churchwardens of Wigan v. Public Works Loan Com. the Masons': hail tavern, Masons'.avenue, Basinghall-st. Sol. missioners
JACKSON, JOHN, victualler, Croft. Pet, Dec. 31. Jan. 19, at
three, at offices of Davies and Co. Warrington. Sols. Davies Kellock v. Enthoven
and Brook, Warrington Comox PLEAS ERRORS.
KAY, ROBERT, plumber, High-st, Hampstead. Pet. Dec. 18.
Jan 13, at two, at offices of Sol. Preston, Newgate-st
KESTERTON, RICHARD, gun case manufacturer, Birmingham.
Pet. Dec. 29. Jan. 19, at twelve, at office of Sol. Powell, Bir
mingham For Argument.
LEATON, HENRY, printer, Leicester. Pet. Dec. 30. Jan. 19, at Winch v. The Conservators of the River Thames
eleven, At the Lion and Dolphin inn, Leicester. Sol. Petty, Same v. Same
LENNOX, HENRY, plasterer, Nottingham. Pet. Dec. 27. Jan. 16, Fowler v. Lock
at twelve, at office of Sol. Belk. Nottingham Ellis v. The Great Western Railway Company
LETHBRIDGE, SARAH, shoemaker, Crediton. Pet. Dec. 30. Jan. Cowan v. The Imperial Ottoman Bank
17, at eleven, at the Ship inn, Crediton. Sol. Floud, Exeter Imperial Ottoman Bank v. Cowan
MACKERETU, JAMES, joiner, Kendal. Pet. Dec. 29. Jan. 15, at
half past eleven, at the Board Room, Market-pl, Kendal. Sol. Rodocanachi v. Elliott
MASON, MARTHA, farmer, Waltham Holycross. Pet. Dec. 29.
Jan. 13. at twelve, at offices of Sols. Jessop and Gough, Wal-
MEAGER, JOSEPH CHARLES, upholsterer, Ventnor, Isle of Wight. Riche . The Ashbury Railway Carriage and Iron Com. Pet, Dec. 30. Jan. 15, at two, at ofilce of Sol. Urry, King's.rd, pady
Gray's-inn, London Butcher v. Savory
MORGAN, GEORGE JOSEPH, bootmaker, Chippenham-ter, Har.
row-rd, also Chichester-ter, Canterbury.rd, Kilburn. Pet. Deo. For Argument.
22. Jan. 12, at two, at office of Sol. Marshall, Lincoln's-inn. Marchant v. The Lee Conservancy Board
fields Daniels 0. The Stepney Union
OWEN, EDWARD, farmer, Ffriddires, par. Cerrigydruidion. Pet. Smith v. Fletcher
Dec. 30. Jan. 15, at twelve, at the Saracen's Head hotel, Cer. Same v. Same.
rigydruidion. Sol. James, Corwen
PAISE, ALFRED, butcher, Essex.rd, Islington. Pet. Dec, 31.
Jan. 16, at twelve, at office of Sols. Sole, Turner, and Turner,
PEACOCK, JOHN THOMAS, victualler, Jamaicard. Bermondsey.
Pet Dec. 30. Jan. 16, at two, at office of Sole. Messrs. Beard,
at twelve, at the Ram hotel, Newark. Sol. Belk, Nottingham Spring Circuits of the Judges chosen on Thursday, RANDS, ELIZABETH, widow, dealer in boots, Ventnor. Pet. Deo. Jan. 15.
wick st, Regent-st
ROBERTA, WILLIAM, farmer, Hendrellyean. Jan. 17, at twelve,
at the Cymro inn, Llangwm). Sol. James, Corwen
otce of Sol. Hearfield, Hull
16, at three, at offices of sol. Nordon, Liverpool
SAVAGE, SAMUEL, shoemaker, Christchurch. Pet. Dec. 29. Jan.
14, at thrre, at office of Miller, Bristol. Sol. Sharp, Christchurch CARTER, ROBERT, jeweller, Birmingham, Pet. Dec. 23. Reg. SHIPLEY, WILLIAN SAMUEL, clerk in holy ciers. Plungar. Pet. Chauntler. Sur. Jan. 19
Dec. 30. Jan. 3. at twelve, at the Guildhall tavern, Gresham.
SIMPSON, JOIN FREDERIC, builder, Leicerter. Pet. Dec. 29.
NES. foreign agents, Manchester. Pet. Dec. 30. Dep-Reg. SLADEN, ELI, bootmaker, Swansea. Pet. Dec. 23. Jan. 12, at two,
At the Stag and Pheasant, Leicester, Sol. Lewis, Swansea
two, at office of Sols. Messrs. Richardson, Thrapatan SADLER, HARVEY HENRY, beerseller, Heybridge. Pet. Dec. 23. STANSFIELD, Eliza, grocer. Springfield. Pet. Dic 20. Jan. 5, at Reg. Gepp. Sur. Jan. 12
eleven, at office of Sols. Wat-on and Dickons, Bradford Gazette, Jan, 6.
STRACHAN, THOMAS MAIRE, clerk in holy orders, Bristol. Pet To surrender at the Bankrupts' Court, Basinghall-street.
Dec. 31. Jan. 13, at one, at Mesers. Williams, accountants, THOMPSON, Joan, upholtterer, Edgware-rd, and WALKER, Bristol. Sols. Brittan, Press, and Iuskip. Bristol
THOMAS. commercial clerk, Langton-rd, Brixton. Pet. Jan. THOMPSON, WILLIAM OSWELL, clerk in holy orders, Slough. Pet.
Dec. 23. Jan. 15, at twelve, at the Guildhall coffee house, Gres-
ham-st. Solg. Barrett and Dean, Slough
29, at one, at one of Sols. Van Sandau and Cumming, King-st, DANIELA, GEORGE SAMUEL, innkeeper, Warwick. Pet. Jan. 2.
TURNER, JOHN. farmer, Edwallon, Pet. Dec. 29. Jan. 20, at
TURRELL, ALFRED, builder, Whitehead's.gr, Chelsea. Pet. Dec.
Bedford-row. Sol. Turner, I awrance.la
Jan. 16, at two, at offices of Sols. Clapham and Finch, Bishops.
WARR, JOSEPI, retall brewer, Tipton. Pet. Dec. 23. Jan. 13, at
eleven, at office of Sol. Travia, Tipton
13, at twelve, at office of Sols. Shirley and Atkinson. Doncaster
at eleven. At office of Sol. Baldwin, Burnley FIRST MEETINGS.
WORDINGHAM, JOUN, farmer, old Bucker ham. Pet. Dec. 29.
Jan. 14, at two, at office of Sols. Winter and Francis, Norwich
WORTHINGTON, ALFRED, photographer, Aberystwith. Pet. Dec.
WOOTTON, WILLIAM, plumber, Shefford. Pet. Dec. 29. Jan. 14,
Sol. Chalk, Moorgate-st
Gazette, Jan. 6.
Jan. 21, at three, at offloes of Sol. Basset., Brompton and
22. Jan. 17, at two, at offices of Sol. Steadma, Coleman.st BALLA, HAROLD GRIFFIN, CURTIS, GEORGE curriers, CAA.
bridge. Pet. Jan. 2. Jan. 20, at three, at Offices of Nicholson, London bridge Railway-approach, Southwark. Sols. Ellison
and Burrows, Cambridge BLACKBURN, JOHN, joiner, Barnfield. Pet. Dec. 31. Jan. 20, at
eleven, at 30, Fore Bondgate, Bishop Auckland. Sol. Maw, Jan. CADMAN, WILLIAM EM MOTT, and CADMAN, WALLACE, print
cutters, Lister-mews, Holloway-rd, Pet. Jan. 1. Jan. 16, at
twelve, at offices of Sol. Chubb, Bucklersbury CHAMBERLAIX, HUGH GOODMAN, fancy hosiery manufacturer,
Leicester. Pet. Jan. 1. Jan. 19, at three, at office of Sol. Owston,
at the Bear hotel, Cliffe
31. Ján. 17, at eleven, at office of Booth, Lincola's-inn-fields CLARK, WILLIAM ROBERT, cheesemonger, Westmoreland-rd,
Camherwell-rd. Pet. Jan. 2. Jan. 17, at two, at office of Sol.
Jan. 20, at two, at office of Barnard, Thomas, Clarke, and Co.,
three, at office of Sol. Morrie, Swansea Dixon, RICHARD, miner, Brandon Colliery. Pet. Jan. 2. Jan.
28, at eleven, at the Station hotel, Durham. Sol. Brignall, jun.,
Dec. 19. Jan. 15, at twelve, at the Wentworth hotel, Peter
borough. Sol. Stapleton EALES, ELLEX, dealer in fancy goods, Birmingham. Pet. Dec. 29. Jan. 16, at twelve, at offices of Slade, accountant, 6, Cherry.
st, Birmingham. Sol. Kennedy, Biriningham ESSER, AUGUSTUS, importer of fancy goods, Manchester. Pet.
Jan. 2. Jan, 21, at tro, at ottice of Sol. Phillips, Manchester FREELING, JAMES EDWARD, gentleman, Bideford. Pet. Jan. 2.
Jan. 19, at twelve, at Bath House, Bidetord. Sol. Smale GILBERTSON, RICHARD, baker, Liverpool. Pet. Jan, 3. Jan.
21, at three, at office of Sol. Ponton, Liverpool GIBSON, MARTHA, widow. Bishopston, par Horfield. Pet. Jan.
2. Jan. 21, at twely, at office of Hancock, Triggs, and Co., public
accountants, Bristol. Sol. King, Bristol GOODWINS, JOSIAH, and GOODWINS, STEPHEX, millers, King's
Lynn. Pet. Jan. 2. Jan. 27, at two, at ollice of Sol. Vernede,
Combe. Pet. Jan. 3. Jan, 19, at one, at office of Sol. Wilton,
1. Jan. 20, at eleven, at office of Sols. Peel and Gaunt, Brad.
ford Hicks, THOMAS, draper, Bristol. Pet. Jan. 3. Jan. 14, at
two, at office or Sol. Beckingham, Bristol HOLSTISS, NILS WILHELM, licensed beer seller, Falmouth.
Pet. Jan. 2. Jan. 20, at three, at once of Sols. Genn and
22, a' two, at ottices of Clennell, solicitor, Great James-st, Bed.
ford.row. Sol. Brandreth, Brighton
At two, at office of Sol. Thorne, Barnstaple
at twelve, at offices of Sol. Jaques, Birmingham
three, at ottices of Sol. Janinan, Chichester
Jan. 20, at eleven, at office of Sol. Duke, Birmingham
Jan. 22, at twelve, at the Bell hotel, Gloucester. Sol. Smith,
at two, at Messrs. Watson, Auction Rooms, Fishergate-st,
Preston. Sols. Cunlift, and Watson, Preston
Pet. Jan. 3. Jan, 20, at two, at offices of Sols. Messrs. Lindo,
King's Armg.yd, Moorgate-st
Jan. 20, at three, at offices of sol. Wheeler, Cheltenham
chester NORTON, WILLIAM, butcher, Walsall. Pet. Jan. 3. Jan. 19, at
eleven, at office of Sol. Stanley, Walwall
Calcutta. Pet. Jan. 3. Jan. 21, at twelve, at office of Harding,
Union.rd, Rotherhithe. Pet. Jan. 3. Jan. 19, at three, at Ofice
of Sol, Siverter, Great Dover-st, Southwark ROSE, WILLIAM, cordwaluer, Lincoln. Pet. Jan. 1. Jan. at
eleven, at offices of Jay, public accountant, Lincoln, sol. Page,
jun., Lincoln SATTERTHWAITE, SAMUEL, commission agent, Birmingham.
Pet. Jan. 2. Jan. 21, at two, at offices of Solo. Maher and Poncia,
Jan. 23, at three, at office of Sols. Fernandes and Gill, Wat.
Choriton upon Medlock. Pet. Jan. 3. Jan. 21, at three, at office
of Sols, Minor, Manchester SMITHER, CHARLOTTE, grocer, Kew.rd, Richmond, and Chapel.
st, Waterloo-st, Hammersmith. Pet. Dec. 23. Jan. 15, at three,
at twelve, at otfice of Soly. Mekars. Carter, Torquay
quarter-pa-t ten, attifices of sol. Hollinshead, Tunstall
one, at the D ake's Arins, Yarcombe. Sl. Tweed, Honiton
Pet. Dec. 29. Jan. 17, at eleven, at office of Sol. Williamson,
Dec. 29. Jan. 19, at three, at once of Cooper, Crais, and Co.,
Iykins, G. p umber, second and final. 4d. At Trust. H. Bolland, 10, Suuth John-st. Liverpool. -Heselline, J. jun., grocer, 24. 3d. At Trust. W. Butcher, 73, Princess ut, Manchester - ilulie, E. wool merchant, second, 28. At Trust. J. Routh, Royal Insurancebidge, Park.row, Leeds
Liquidations by Arrangement.
BIRTHS MARRIAGES AND DEATHS
Kent, the wife of F. P. Baddeley, solicitor, of a daughter. BULLEN.On the 27th ult., at 2, Belsize-road, South Bampstead the wife of E. U. Bullen, Esq., barrister-at-law, or a daughter.
Benjamin John Armstrong, Esq., J.P. for the county of Middle-