Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr. Hemsley, the prisoner's master, replying to BEARE (Major Wm. G.), 34, Deronshire-place, St. Maryle- Fulham-road.-No. 61 and 63, Waterford-road, term 82 years

bone, Middlesex. March 31; Palmer. Eland, and Netile- -sold for £320. Mr. Montague Williams, said the deficiencies, in

ship, solicitors, 4, Trafalgar-square, London.

Edgware-road.-No. 1, Milner-mews, term 18 years-sold all, amounted to at least £200.

BECK Elizabeth), Church House, Washington, Sussex. for £220, The jury found the prisoner guilty of feloniously March 31; C. A. Wright, solicitor, Ironmonger's Hall,

By Messrs. Edwix Fox and BOUSFIELD. uttering the forged cheque.

Fenchurch-street, London, E.C.
BFIBBY (Sidney). The Codars, Laurie Park, Sydenham,

Clapham.common. – The freehold residence, Holywood

sold for £6100. Montagu Williams said there was another Kent, Esq. May 1; Pattison, Wigs, and Co., solicitors, charge against the prisoner of embezzling two

50, Lombard-street, London.

Balham-bill. - The residence Chestnut House, freehold

sold for £2000. BRAITHWAITE (Mary), New Millfat, Slegill, Morland, Westsums of £52 odd belonging to the estate, but, moreland, spinster. March 18; George R. Thompson,

The freehold residences Hillside, Arundel House, and after the verdict, he did not propose to proceed solicitor, Appleby.

Hookwood Lodge-cold for £3060, with it. The prisoner, he added, had been con. BROADWOOD (Charles H.), Belgrave House, Preston, near

Tuesday, Feb. 24. Brighton, Sussex, Esq. April 15; Elpton and Co., solici. By Messrs. BROAD, PRITCHARD, and WILTSHIRE, at the victed at this court upwards of twenty-two years tors, 20, Austin friars, London.

Mart. ago; but the officer who had him then in charge BROOK8 (John), the Brewery, Hili-street, Peckham, and of Gray's-inn-road.-No. 15, Portpool-lane, and Nos. 1 to 5 had died, and it was impossible formally to prove

Champion-park, Camberwell, Surrey, brewer.

28

Hall-Moon-court-sold for £800,

E. J. Layton, solicitor, 2, Suffolk-lane, Cannon-street, the conviction.

London.

Policy for £200, life, aged 14 years-old for £36.

A ditto for £1000, on same life-sold for £151. Mr. Commissioner KERR sentenced him to five BROWN (Horace C.), late a Captain in the Royal Artillery.

A ditto for £1000, on samne life-sold for £140.

May 1; M. and F. Davidson, solicitors, 35, Springyears' penal servitude. gardens, London,

By Messrs. CHIXNOCK, GALSWORTHY, and Co. BANDEN (John). Ledbury, Hereford, mercer and woollen Newington.-One thirty-sixth share of the leasehold estates draper. March 31: J. H. Smith, solici'or, Ledbury.

and funds of the late Samuel Brandon, Esq. - sold for

£1600. UNCLAIMED STOCK AND DIVIDENDS IN THE

CAMPBELL (Sarah M.), Atherstone, Warwick, spinster.

March 5; Wordsworth Blake and Co., solicitors, South By Messrs. DIHAY, TIwox, and FARXER.
BANK OF ENGLAND.
Sea House, Threadneedle-street, London.

Portman-square. No. 28, Upper Berkeley-street, with [Transferred to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the COBB (Mary A.), The George, 2. St. Mary Axe, London, National Debt, and which will be paid to the persons licensed víctualler. March 25 ; J. D. Thompson, solicitor, Marylebone. -No. 18, Crawford-street, termn 30 years-sold

stabling, term 14 years--sold for £900. respectively whose names are prefixed to each in three 9. Liucoln's-inn-fields, Middlesex.

for £710. months, unless other claimants sooner appear.) Conex (Nathan), 2, Clarence-square, and 84, North-street,

No. 30, Upper Baker-street, term 27 years--old for £9-n. HARVEY (Chas.), Guildford, Surrey, licensed victualler, Brighton, pewspaper proprietor and printer. May 1; seven dividends on the sum of £161 ls., and one dividend Clarke and Howlett, solicitors, S, Ship-street, Brighton.

Nos. 12 and 13, Park-place, and Nos, 254 and 25B, Park.

street, term 21 years-sold for £1820. on £506, 163. New Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimant, COLLIS (Geo. T.), formerly of Hurst, Berks, and late of

Portman-square.-No. 10, York-street, term 14 years-sold said Chas, Harvey.

Great Knolly's-street, Reading, blacksmith. May 1; T. for , WINTERBOTNAM Thos.), Great Dover-street, Southwark, Cooke, solicitor, Wokingham, Berks.

Marylebone.-No. 7, Beaumont-street, term 15 years-sold Robinson (Thos. Leedham), Croydon, and Roberts CORNWALL (Geo.), Parkview, near Bandon, Çork, late of

for £160. (John), Sidmouth.st., Gray's-inn-road, wine and spirit 108, Jermyn-street, St. James's, Middlesex, late a Major No. 21, Northumberland-mews, terin 17 years-sold for £19. merchants, £925 Three per Cent. Anuuities. Claimants, in H.M.'s 93rd Regiment of Highlanders. March 3n;

Clapham.-Nos. 1 and 2, Nelson-row, term 36 years-sold said Thor. Winterbotham and Thomas Leedham Robin. Deane and Co., solicitors, 14, South-square, Gray's-inn,

for £195. son, the survivors.

London.
COTGRAVE (Richard E. F.), 74, Gloucester-street, Pimlico,

Freehold ground-rent of L3 per annum-gold for £120.
APPOINTMENTS UNDER THE JOINT-STOCK
Middlesex, & retired Colonel in the R. E. Bombay Army.

By Mr. W. H. MOORB.
WINDING-UP ACTS.

March 20; Wm. Woolfryes, solicitor, Banwell, Somerset. St. John's-wood.-No. 3, Cunningham-place, term 49 years

CRAIGIE (Gor. Bir Patrick E.), K.C.B., formerly of Fuil. -sold for L6Y0. COLONIAL AXD FOREIGN MEAT SUPPLY Co. (LIMITED).- brooks, old Maldon, afterwards of Millmead House, Notting-hill.-No, 133, Clarendon-road, term 66 years-sold Petition for winding-up to be heard March 13, before Guildford, Surrey, and late of St. Leonard's-on-Sea. for £590. V.C. H.

April 4, Fladgate and Co., solicitors, 40, Craven-street, Poplar.-No. 120, Grundy-street, freehold-sold for £?20). CO-OPERATIVE BREWERY COMPANY (LIMITED). Creditors to Strand, London.

Limehouse.-No. 20, Piggot-street, term 41 years -suid for. send in by March 27 their names and addresses, and the CURWEN (Jane P.), Lapton Towers, Lupton, Kirkby Lons- LO. particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses dale, Westmoreland, spinster. March 31; T. Milburn, Mile-end.rnal.-No. 42, St. Peter's-street, term 66 yearg of tbeir solicitors, if any, to D. Roberts and Peckham and solicitor, 5, Washington-street, Washington, Cumberland sold for £20. Co., solicitors, 17. Knight Rider-street, Doctor's Com. EccLEs (Richard), Walthew House, near Wigan, Larcaster, Hammersmith.-Nos. 11 and 13, Redmore-street, term 97 mons, London, liquidators of the said company. April 19; And of Lark Hill, Lord-street, Southport. Esq. April 8; years-sold for £90. at the chambers of the M. R. at eleven o'clock, is the time Anderson and Co., solicitors, 4, Brunswick-court, Liver. Euston-square.- Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Little Clarendon-street, appointed for bearing and adjudicating upon such claims. pool.

term 10 yearg-sold for £150. JUNIUS NEWSPAPER COMPANY. Creditors to send in by EDWARDS (John), Trematon Hall, St. Stephens, Saltash,

Thursday, Feb. 26. March 14 their names and addresses and the particulars Cornwall, Esq. March 31; N. Bennett, solicitor, 1, Fur. of their claims, and the names and widresses of their soli- pival's.ind, London

By Messrs. FAREBROTHER, LYE, and Co., at the Mart. citors, if any, to R. Lec, 3, Furnival's Inn. London, the FRY (Geo), formerly of Hastings, afterwards of the Island New Bond-sereet, No. 21.-An improved rent of L65 per official liquidator of the said company. March 2S; at the of Sark, and late of High Beech, Hastings, surgeon. annum, term 14 years-sold for £500. chambers of the M.R., at twelve o'clock, is the time ap- April 1, Walter Sprett, solicitor. Mayfield, Sussex.

Tuesday, Varch 3. pointed for hearing and adjudicating upon such claims. GIFFORD '(Wm. J.), formerly of Ford, near Wellington, Tuxis RAILWAY COMPANY LIMITED). Creditors to send in Somerset, Esq, afterwards of King-street, Bloomsbury,

By Messrs. HARDS, VAUGHAX, and JENKIX80x, at the Mart, by April ll their names and adıdresses and the particulars Middlesex, and subsequently of Gray's-inn.square, Mid.

Soho -No, 46, Gorord street, freeehold-sold for 21955. of their claims, and the nomes and audresses of their soli. dlesex. March 14; 0. Leefe, solicitor, 60, Lincoln's-inn.

By Messrs. Toplis and HABDIXG. citors, if any, to Lieut. Col. F.D. Grey and J. H. Webster fields, London. 1.2. Gresham House, Old Broad-strect. London, the liqui. JACKSON Frances J.), Berkhampstead, Hertford, spinster.

Lower Edmonton.--- Church.street, freehold house, with dators of the said company. April 20; at the chambers of

wutbuldings-sold for 2730. March 31; Fielder and Sumner, solicitors, 11, Godliwan. V.C. M., at twelve o'clock, is the time appointed for street, Doctors'.commons, London.

Dudley.cottage, freehold-sold for £270.

Nos. 1 and 2 Church-villas--sold for £710. hearing and adjudicating upon such claims. JEFFS (Sarah), late of 13, High-street, Stoke Newington

Kingsland road.-10 23:2, term 15 years-sold for £100.
(formerly known as f, Midd eton-blace,,tok: Newington. St. George's-road.-Nos. 38 to 13, i'itt-street, term 7 years-
road), Middlesex, widow. April 6: Bicknell and Horton,

sold for £110.
CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. solicitors, 161, Edgwar. road, Hide.purk, L ndon.
LAST DAY OF PROOF.
Jouxson (John), Altrincham and Hale, Chester, timber

Twenty £100 shares in the Vauxhall-bridge Company-sold

for £300. merchant and wod turner. April 2; M. Fowden, solicitor,

Wednesday, March. 4. BELL (James), Leicester, gentleman. March 20; C. J. Mrket-street, Altrincbam.

Hunter, solicitor. March 27; V.C. B. at twelve o'clock. JONES (John W., North Petherton, Somerset, gentleman. By Messrs. WINSTANLEY and HORWOOD, at the Mart. CAFFIN (William, Blackheath, Kent, Esq. March 20; March 25 ; Reed and Cook, soli itors, Bridgewater.

New Crossroad.-No. 298, term f8 years-sold for £775. William Holmes, solicitor, 20, Threadneedle-street, Lon: LAWRENCE' (Reuben, 13, Caroline-street, Bloomsbury, St. George's in ihe-East.-No.3, North-eust-passage, term don. April 15th M. R. at eleven o'clock,

Middlesex, gentleman. March 31; S. Potter, solicitor, 32 years-sold for £905. Coll! William), Bombay, East Indies, a medical office- 36, King.street, Cheapside, London.

in the Bombay army, and assay master at Bombar, and LAWRINSON (Matilda formerly of 7, Clifton-place, and of Piccadilly, Middlesex. May 2!; F. Wm. Farrer, afterwards of 10, Albert-terrace, St. Leonard, Exeter, solicitor, 66, Lincoln's-inn-fields, London, June 5; V.c.

MR. J. G. MacCarthy, M.P. for Mallow, was and late of Southport, Lancaster, spinster. May 1; H., at one o'clock.

Simpson and Cullingford, solicitors, 85, Gracechurch.

admitted an attorney and solicitor in Easter COPPARD (Wm.), 3d, Bennett-street, Greenwich, Kent. street, London.

Term 1853. He was born at Cork, where he is March 23; Wm. Holmes, solicitor, 20, Threadneedle. LAZARUS (Moses), 46, Woburn-place, Rnssell-square, LonAtreet, London. March 31; V.C.H., at one o'clock.

don, Middlesex, jeweilır. March 31; D. Woolt, solicitor,

still in the exercise of his profession. He was CHOWDEN (Wm.), March, Isle of Ely, Cambridge, former 17, King.street, Cheapside, London.

educated at St. Vincent's College, Cork.
Aprill; Daw'barn and Wise, solicitors, March April 21; LLOYD (Robert N.), the Stock Exchange, London. May 1;
V.C. B., at twelve o'clock.
Alfred Borwick, Lloyds, London, E.C.

MR. W. GORDON, M.P. for Chelsea, was ad. Deas Henry, 4, Vernon-road, old Ford, Middleser, oil. NATTRISGeo. , Bristol, confectioner. May 1;, Whitting. mitted an attorney and solicitor in Trinity Term man. April 1; R. D. Strong, solcitor, 51), Bishopsgale. ton and Co., solicitor, 14, Sma l-street, Bristol.

1840, and is in practice alone in the City of street Within, London. April 20; V.C. B., at twelve NEWEY (John). Westow Hill, Norwood, Surrey, painter and o'clock,

glazier. March 31; Ga co'te, Wadham, and Daw, soli. London, having succeeded to his deceased father's KEKEWICH (Samuel T. Peamore. Devon, Esq., M.P. citors, 19, Essex-street, Strand, London.

extensive English, Scotch, and Colonial practice March 18; Crarle, J. Follett, soli itor, Exeter, Apr 1 15. Penny, Sarah), Everstield Houre, 105, Abbey.road, St. V. C. B., at 12 o'clock.

there.

John's Wood, Middlesex, spinster. April1; White and Co., LOWERY (T008., 3, Albion-terrace, Commero'al-road East, folicitors, 6, Whitehall Place, Westminster, London. It is reported that the post of Chairman of

Middlesex, Trinity pilot. March 30; H. Grai", solicitor, PRINCE (Anre), of Goodyers. Hendon, Mindlesex, widow. Ways and Means, filled in the last Parliament by 2. Philpot-lane, Londyn, April 15. V. 0. H., at 12 May 1; Kynaston and Gasquet, solicitors, 88, Queeno'clock. street, Cheapside, London.

Mr. Bonham Carter, late M.P. for Winchester, has MANN (Jas. H.', 3. Albert-road, Regent's-park, Middle- ROBERTY (Chas.), Castle Tavern. Holloway-road, Middle been offered by the new Premier to a member of sex, gentleman. April 2; Edward Hoare, solicitor, sex, licensed victualler, March 31; J. Parkinson, soli. Great James-street, Bedford-row, Middlesex, April 15. citor, 35, Holloway.road, London.

the House who is a solicitor. M. R., at 11 o'clock.

Rooke Barab E... Barnton, Chester, widow. March 20; MR. C. E. LEWIS, M.P. for Londonderry city, MOON (Win.), Godalming, Surrey, common carrier and H. Tyrrell, solicitor, 11, Gray's-inn-square, London. Turmer., March 31; J. and M. Pontifex, solicitors, St. SAMLER (Major F.. Westbourne-park-road, Bayswater,

was admitted an attorney and solicitor in Hilary Andrew's-street, Holborn Circus, London. April 15; Middlesor. March 25; H. Samler, solicitor, 23, Carter: Term 1847. He formerly practised in Lincoln's. V.C. H., at twelve o'clock.

lane, Doctors ecommons, London. Mokey (Jos.), 3, Pulteney-street, Barnsbury, Middlesex.

inn-fields, but is now the senior partner in the SHAW (Jas.) Kingston-upon-Hull, licensed victualler. April 20; E. E. Toller, solicitor, Dean's-court, Doctor'g. April i; J. L. Jacobs, solicitor, County-buildings, Hull.

firm of Messrs. Lewis, Munns, and Longden, of common, London, March 31; V.C. M., at twelve SMALLYAN (Thog. A.4, Moor-street, Burton-upon-Trent, Old Jewry, in the City of London. He is a mem. o'elnck.

Statford, articled clerk at latv. March 31; W. B. Hextall, ber of most of the institutions supported by MUSKETT (Jar. F.), 90, High-street, Clapham, and the solicitor, Albert-street. Derby.

Vurgery, Clapham, Surrey, florist April 4; Jas. Neal, THORP Wm. P. Sheen-lane, üortlake, Surrey, gentleman. solicitors. solicitor, I and 5. Pinner's Hall, Old Broad-street, Lon. March 25; Anderson and Sons, solicitors, 17, Ironmonger- MR. JUSTICE BLACKBURN's complaint, at the dou. April 18; V.0. H., at twelve o'clock.

lane, Cheapside, London. OPM TON Ralph, 5, Upper Weymouth-street, Middlesex, TWELVETREEN (Robert), Biggleswade, Bedford, baker. recent sittings at Guildhall in the City of London,

greengrocer, April 1; J. Goren, solicitor, 29, South March 25; Hooper and Raynes, solicitors, Biggleswade. upon the subject of the inconvenience occasioned Molton-street, Oxford-street, London. April 15; M.R., TWYNAM (Hon. Mary E.), Bath, widow. March 25; W. at half.past eleven o'clock. Ford, solicitor, Auminster. Devon.

by attorneys not giving notice to the officers of STUART (John, 1. High-xtreet, Hornsey. Middlesex, baker, WADHAM_(Emily J.), Clifton, widow. March 1; Gas. the court when causes were intended to be with.

March 20; J. P. Poncione, jun., 5, Raymond. buildings, cotte. Wadham, and Daw, solicitors, 19, Essex-street, drawn, was, we think, misdirected. Attorneys
Gray's-inn, Middlesex. April 13 ; V.C. M., at twelve Strand, Middlesex,
o'clock.
Wallis (Henry, Buglo-street, Southampton, builder.

are themselves otficers of the Superior Courts, SATCLIFFE (Wm.), Royal Lunatic Asylum, Cheadle, Chester, April 20; Hickman and Son, solicitors, 7, Albion-place, and it is competent for the judges to make rules

A person of unsound mind. March 31; Edwin Almond, Southampton.
solicitor, Kennedy-street, Manchester. April 13; V.C. WELLS (John), Hawler House, Tadley, Southampton,

on the subject in question, with which, of course, M., at twelve o'clock,

gentleman, April 5; W. H. Cave, solicitor, Newbury, all officers of the courts will comply, and for com. TORBY (Richard), Long Stratton, Norfolk, farmor. March Berks.

plying with which their proper costs, charges, 17; Geo, A. Rooks, solicitor, 16, King-street, Cheapside, WOOLVERTON, (Jas.), Bramley, Surrey, gontleman. April and expenses should be allowed on taxation. London. March 25; V.C.M., at twelve o'clock.

15 ; R. E. Mellersh, solicitor, Godalming, Surrey. WILKIN (Jas.), Jackett's Farm, Danbury and Dalton's

THE Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Hall, Purleigh. Essex, farmer. March 28; Wm.J. Bruty, solicitor, 6. Tokenhouse-yard, London, April 14 ; M. R.,

REPORTS OF SALES.

is composed of the Lord President, the Lord at eieven o'clock.

Chancellor, the Archbishops of Canterbury and

York, the Lords Justices of the Court of Appeal CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT, c. 35.

Saturday, Feb. 21.
Last Day of Claim, and to whom Particulars to be sent.
By Messrs. RUSHWORTH, ABBOTT, and Co., at the Mart.

in Chancery, the Lord Chief Justices of the ALLENDER (Geo.), formerly of Copthall.court, London, Maida-hill.–No. 67, Hamilton-terrace, term 62 years-sold Queen's Bench and Common Pleas,

the Lord stuckbroker, late of 35, Kennington-park-gardens, Mid. for £1230.

Chief Baron of Exchequer, the judge of the Court dlesex, gentleman. March St; Paine and Layton,

Great Berkhampstead. – Raren’s-lane, a residence, with of Probate and High Court of Admiralty; also solicitors, 47, Gresham House, Old Broad-stroet, London.

stabling and pleasure grounds, freehold-sold for £610. BALLEY (Jane), 10, Park-hill, Bristol, widow. March 21;

By Messrs. WILKINSON and HORNE.

such prelates as are Privy Councillors, and all Hunt, Hodgson, and Bobbett, solicitors, Bristol Cham. bere, Nicholas-street, Bristol,

Kensington.-No. 15, Durham-villas, term 78 years-sold for Privy Councillors who have held any of the offices £130.

before mentioned, with four paid judges and the

3

1

BETWEEN

FOR

AND

following subordinate officers: An Indian Assessor, recompense not to exceed the double value of the there was not sufficient internal reference to each
a Clerk of Appeals, a Registrar, a Registrar in goods so purloined, “embeziled,” &c. He had, other in these three writings to constitute a note
Admiralty and Ecclesiastical Causes. A large therefore, to order the prisoner to pay the double of a
portion of the business which comes under the value, 368., of the boots he had purloined, or in Statute of Frauds

bargain within the 17th section of the cognizance of this tribunal is conducted by default of sufficient distress to be imprisoned for N. S. 919. Q. B.)

(Pierce v. Corf, 29 L. T. Rep. gentlemen who are not members of the legal fourteen days with hard labour. The Act further Profession.

provided that the prisoner while in gaol should be
The following is, we believe, a correct list once whipped in such manner as the justice might
of the names of the several solicitors who think fit. He could not think, however, that the

MARITIME LAW.
have from time to time been concerned in Legislature, when amending the law relating to
the celebrated case commonly known as the master and servant, had intended, although re.

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS.
Tichborne case, now happily terminated : Messrs. ferring to the Act of Geo. 2, c. 8, but not men-

COLLISION-Fog-RIGHT OF FERRY BOAT TO Holmes ; Moojen ; Gibbes Baxter, Rose, and tioning the section, to allow such a law to stand, boat continuing to cross and recross the river

Run LIABILITY-PRACTICE. — A steam ferry Norton Gorton ; Hendricks ; Harcourt; Dobin. and, therefore, ho would take upon himself to Mersey during a dense fog takes upon herself the son and Geare ; Callington; Gray, Q.C. ; Pollard; dispenso with the second portion of the punish; responsibility

incident to such a course, and is not Stephens; and Bowker.

ment. He added that the Act ought to be called entitled to set up public convenience against the THE following Lectures and Classes are ap- attention to, and he hoped it would be done. By probability of loss of life and property, but she pointed for the ensuing week at the Hall of the the same section a person guilty of purloining or Instruction of students seeking admission on the to him to make up by a master is rendered liable those vessels take the precautions required by Incorporated Law Society, Chancery.lane, for the making away with any portion of goods intrusted will be liable for any damage done to other

vessels

with which she may come into collision, provided roll of attorneys and solicitors : Monday, class, to pay, quadruplo value, and to be twice flogged law to warn her of their position. A receiver of 4.30 to 6 o'clock, Conveyancing; Tuesday, class, publicly. 4.30 to 6 o'clock, Conveyancing; Wednesday,

wreck in taking depositions under the Merchant class, 4.30 to 6 o'clock, Conveyancing; Friday,

Shipping Act 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 101) sect. 448, lecture, 6 to 7 o'clock, Common Law. To prevent

REAL PROPERTY AND

should put down the facts deposed to as given by interruption at the lecture, subscribers are not

the deponent, and should not correct any state. admitted to the Hall after a lecture has com.

CONVEYANCING.

ment made by the deponent which within the per. menced.

sonal knowledge of the receiver is erroneous : An issue of 2,500,000 dols. (£500,000 sterling)

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS.

(The Lancashire, 29 L. T. Rop. N. S.927. Adm.) First Mortgage Seven per Cent. Sinking Fund

WILL-ESTATES OF TRUSTEES-PAYMENT OF
Gold Bonds of 1000 dols. (£200) each of the Paris DEBTS — RULES OF CONSTRUCTION

- CONTIN.
and Danville Railroad and Coal Company of GENT REMAINDERS-DECREE.-J. C., by will, in

COMPANY LAW.
Illinois is announced. The issue price is £170 1827, devised freeholds to trustees, their heirs,
sterling per bond of £200. At the price of issue and assigns, and to the survivor of them, and his

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. shese bonds will yield as an investment nearly 83 or her heirs, upon trust that they and their heirs,

CONTRIBUTORY VOID AMALGAMATION per cent. per annum. The principal and interest of and the survivor of them, and his or her heirs, this issue are secured by a first mortgage upon should stand seised thereof during the life of W.C., LETTERS OF ALLOTMENT. - In the year 1969 an

APPLICATION

SHARES the whole of the company's railroad franchises, and also until the testator's debts were paid, apon amalgamation was agreed upon between the P. rolling stock, and property of every description, trusts to set and let the same, and to apply the and real estate, including coal and mineral lands rents and profits, and the value of the timber, in Company (Limited),

and the U. Company, which now owned. The bonds having a priority of lien discharge of debts, and then for W. C. for life,

was an unlimited company, under which the paid. upon all the franchises and property of the com. and then and after the debts were paid, for the up, shareholders in the P. Company were to have pany of whatever kind or quality of every descrip. heirs of the body of W. C., with remainder to his paid-up shares in the U. Company to the amount tion of the value of £1,800,000 now owned, and own heirs. In 1830, the debts having been paid, of their shares in the P. Company, and the partly also upon all property which

may be hereafter the trustees conveyed to w. c. for life. In 1838 paid-ap shareholders in the P. Company were to acquired by the company, The foliowing par: W. C. suffered a recovery. He subsequently have shares in the U. Company, on which an ticulars are furnished by the company: The road mortgaged to the defendant in fee. Upon a bill amount was to be considered to have been paid is located between the Illinois Central Railway tiled to have it declared that the conveyance of proportionate to the amount credited on their P. and Wabash River through a densely populated, the life estate by the trustees was a breach of shares. The P. Company was to assign its assets wealthy, and productive country, of about seventy trust, and that the defendant was a trustee for to the U. Company, and the U. Company to under. miles in width, containing no other parallel rail. the plaintiff, a son, and heir at law, of w. c.: take its liabilities. An indenture in two parts road in competition for its business. Its line is Held (disapproving the decision of Lord Romilly but in consequence of a variation between the

was drawn up and executed by tho two companies, through a succession of highly-cultivated farms, in Collier v McBean, 34 Beav.426), that the trustees growing cities, and villages. The road, when took an estate of freehold ; that the devise to them respective parts executed by the companies the completed, will form the middle one-third of a "and their heirs" gave a fee simple, unless some.

indenture was in 1873 held incomplete, and the through line from Chicago to Cairo, Paducah, and thing appeared by the will to cut it down; that in the P. Company, on which £100 had been paid,

amalgamation void. B., the holder of forty shares Shawnee town, and connecting these points, and it is not to be cut down unless another estate can through them the leading southern railways with be pointed out on the face of the will for the trus. signed, and sent to the P. Company a form of Chicago by the most direct route. The road is tees to take ; that neither a chattel interest application supplied by them to him, for shares in 102 miles long, thirty-six miles of which are now superadded to, or concurrent with, the life estate, exchange for forty shares held by me in the P.

the U. Company, “ credited with £100 thereon, in completed and in operation. 1,050,000 dols. have until the debts were paid, was a proper construcbeen expended in the construction of the road and tion of the gift, nor was it a correct view that company, on which £100 has been paid," and on the purchase and development of the mines. they took a freehold interest per

autre vie during the 5th Aug: 1869, received a letter of allotment 5000 dols. per mile is paid up to the capital stock the life of the tenant for life with a further informing him that he had been entered as a share of the company at par by individual and corporate chattel interest, till the debts were paid; but that holder in the U. Company, and that “the amount subscribers. they took the fee; that a trust to " set and let

to be credited on such shares will be the propor. gives not a bare power, but an estate which, tionate amount of the net assets of the P. Com. MAGISTRATES' LAW. being indefinite, must be a fee simple ; that a

pany (Limited).” B, took no steps to repudiate trust to apply the" value of whatever timber may

the shares, although the allotment letter varied be considered at its best growth” implies a fee for from the application, but made several applicaWORSHIP STREET POLICE COURT. tenant per autre vie, as the owner of a chattel tions for certificates of the sharos allotted. The Monday, March 2.

interest

cannot cut timber ; that the contingent certicates were never sent to B., and on tho 9th

remainder having gone at law by recovery it did Nov. 1869 a winding-up order was made against (Before Mr. BUSHBY.)

not remain in equity; that the trustees were not the U. Company. Xeld, that there was no con. Master and Serrants Act Shoemakers in any sense trustees to preserve contingent re.

tract between B. and the U. Company to take 9 Geo. 1, c. 27. mainders ; and that the conveyance to the tenant shares, that he was not bound by acquiescence,

and that he could not be placed upon the list of A MAN was brought up charged with stealing a

for life was not a breach of trust. There is no
pair of boots, value 188., the property of his em. such thing as an implied trust to preserve. Held, eontributories : (Beck's case, 29 L. T. Rep. N. S.
ployer. The short facts of the case were that the also, that the mortgagee having in another suit, tó 907. V.C. B.)
prisoner had been employed by a bootmaker to which the present plaintiff was a party, obtained
make up a pair of boots, he working on his a decree for getting in the outstanding legal

COUNTY COURTS.
master's premises. He left ostensibly for dinner, estate, the plaintiff was bound by that decree :
and never returned. The boots were afterwards (Collier v. Walters, 29 L. T. Rep. N. S. 869.
missed, and information was given to the police. M. R.)

SALFORD COUNTY COURT.
Some time afterwards the prisoner was appre.
AUCTIONEER-MEMORANDUM IN WRITING OF

Jan. 13 and Feb. 16.
hended, and when charged said that he would A BARGAIN-INTERNAL REFERENCE TO SEVERAL

(Before J. A. RUSSELL, Q.C., Judge.) pay for the boots if the prosecutor would forgive DOCUMENTS-STATUTE OF FRAUDS. - Plaintiff

ALDRED V. WHITEHEAD.
him. Before the court he attempted to set up authorised defendant, an auctioneer, to sell a
the defence that some other person had stolen the mare, which was accordingly entered as a lot in

Equitable mortgage.
boots.

the catalogue attached to the conditions of sale A., an equitable mortgagee, without deposit of The prosecutor, however, in reply to Mr. Bushby, for a certain day; “49, grey mare, 6 years old, deeds, under an agreement which charged certain said that the prisoner did not return for his 15-3 hands high; steady to ride and drive." She leasehold property with the payment of a certain wages.

was knocked down at the sale on the day fixed sum, and in which it was provided that the Mr. BUSHBY, having looked into the Master and for 33 guineas, and a clerk made an entry at the defendant should at any time thereafter execute Servants Act, said that he found recited there the time, opposite the lot, in the defendant's sales a legal mortgage of the property with snch Act 8 & 9 Geo. 1 c. 27, s. 4. That Act provided ledger, of the price and name of the buyer. This power of sale and other powers as the plaintiff for offences of the kind charged against the ledger was headed “Select Sales by Auction,” might require, asked for the usual accounts and prisoner, and from its being unrepealed it was im. with the same date as the catalogue. The de. a sale of the mortgaged property. possible to deal with the charge in any other way. scription had been entered before the sale, as Held, that he was only entitled to specific per. The Act provided that from and after the 1st " Lot 49, groy mare, aged 6.”. The buyer the formance of the agreement. May 1740 any person or persons employed in same day returned the mare to the defendant, Ashton v. Corrigan, Matthews v. Goodday, Peto v. cutting, making up, &c., any skins, boots, shoes, with a letter written and signed by him, “I here. Hammond, Hermann v. Hodges, and James v. &o., who should fraudulently purloin, "embezil,” with return the grey mare, Lot 49, bought at your James referred to. secrete, pawn, exchange, &c., any portion of the sale this day, as not being steady in harness, as S. Hall (barrister), instructed by C. W. Dawson, material in which such person or persons should warranted : Held, in an action against the Bolton, for the plaintiff. be employed, or do any act to lessen the value of auctioneer for damages for not making a binding Dr. Pankhurst (barrister), instructed by Gooden, such material, either before or after the making contract with the buyer, that, without express Bolton, for the defendant. up, &c., should upon conviction be ordered to authority, an auctioneer's clerk cannot be taken This was a plaint by an equitable mort. make a reasonable recompense for his offence, such' to be agent to sign a buyer's name; and that'gagee asking for the usual accounts and

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

7

.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

1

[ocr errors]

sale of the mortgaged property. The plaint LIVERPOOL BANKRUPTCY COURT. proceedings for or towards liquidation or com. stated an agreement between the plaintiff and

Saturday, Feb. 23.

position, the proper costs incurred in relation to defendant, whereby the defendant, in consider.

such proceedings shall be paid by the trustee, ation of £283 10s. owing by him to the plaintiff,

(Before PERRONET THOMPSON, Esq., Judge.)

unless the court shall otherwise order. The charged certain leasehold premises with the re

F.: parte BOLLAND; Re MALLEY.

question is, were proceedings for a composition payment of the said £283 10s., and of furthur | Bankruptcy Act 1859 – Order and disposition pending at the time of the bankruptcy ? Forta. advances and interest, and agreed at any time

section.

nately, I am not entirely without guidanco as to thereafter to execute a legal mortgage of the said Gonils in the possession of neutral or third parties the construction which ought to be put upon this premises subject to certain building society standing in the name of the original owner, rule. In the case of Ex parte Howell, re Hawes mortgages, with such power of sale and other

without notice to the neutral parties of change (29 L. T. Rep. N. S. 859), Mellish, L. J. is reported powers as the plaintiff might require; and after of ownership

to have said that the object of the provision stating that the defendant refuses either to Hell, to ve property divisible amongst the cre

made by the rule was, he thought, plain enough. execute a mortgage or to pay the amount owing ditov*8.

If there were no such provision, no solicitor on the security of the said agreement, prayed the Quære, whether a transfer of property requires would ever act on behalf of a debtor who de. relief above mentioned. There was no actual

l'efjistration as a bill of sale.

sired him to present a petitton for liquida. deposit of deeds. It was contended on behalf of This was a morinn by Mr. Bolland, the trustee of tion, or would recommend a debtor to adopt the defendant that the proper relief on the above the property of the debtor, a rag and rope mer. such proceeding, without getting his costs plaint was not a sale, but a specific performance chant in Liverpool, for an order of the court to beforehand, and that might prevent many of the agreement, and counsel quoted Ashton v. declare that certain rope lying at the railway persons from presenting petitions at all. The Corrigan (L. Rep. Eq. 76), James V. James (16 station in the name of Malley, of which rope a Mr. object of the rule was that solicitors, if they L. Rep. Eq.), Seton on Decrees (vol. 1, p. 413), and Hewetson held the railway advice notes, was the acted fairly, might be able to get their costs Fisher on Mortgages (vol. 1). property of the trustre.

although the proceedings for liquidation proved Holl, for the plaintiff, in reply, said that under henvily, instructed hy Jasters and Fletcher, abortive and bankruptcy ensued. That being the above stated agreement he was entitled to a appeared for Mr. Hewetson.

the object of the rule, such a construction should, sale at his option, if he chose to waive the specific Martin, solicitor, for Mr. Bolland.

if possible, be pat upon it as would fairly carry out performance of the agreement, and referred to

The question, by arrangement, originally came that object. In his Lordship's opinion it was not Prideaux's Precedents (vol. 1), from which the before a jury, and was reported in the Law Tires necessary to put such a strict construction on the agreement seemed to have been taken, and also to of 10th Dec last, but it heiny found that the issue words as to hold that whenever anything occurred Matthews v. Goodday (8 Jur. N. S. 90), and Peto Wis one of law rather than of fact, the jury were which rendered liquidation impossible under the v. Hammond (8 Jur. N. S. 550). Ashton v. Corri- discharged, and the question left for the decision petition, the proceedings were no longer pending. gan only decided that the mortgagee under the of the court.

In that case a petition for liquidation had been special terms of his agreement was entitled to a mortgage containing an absolute power of sale, rope, the ownership of which is in dispute, was

His Honour now said: In this case certain filed ; at the first meeting the creditors negatived

the resolution for liquidation, and on the followand the earlier cases were not discussed. Neither sold by arrangement between the parties, and the ing day the debtor was adjudicated a bankrupt. that case nor the later cases of Hermann v.

trnstes under the liquidation morcs for an order The Chief Judge, whose decision was upheld on Hodges, and Janes v James, nor the autho, that he is entitled to retain the money arising from appeal, held that the proceedings were pending rities in Fisher and Seton are inconsistent with the sale. This application I think well founded, within the 292nd rule, and that the solicitor in the Matthews v. Goodday. There could have been no for, assuming that the writing of 30th Sept. 1872, liquidation was entitled to his costs out of the actual deposit of deeds in this case, but that can given by Malley to Hewetson did not require bankrupt's estate. I quote that case only because make no difference.

registration under the Bills of Sale Act 1854, II believe all previous cases bearing on the subject His Honour, in giving judgment, said that so careful and distinguished a judge as Wickens, divisible amongst Valley's creditors, as being, by latest case in which the subject has been con

think that tho rope in question was property were mentioned in the argument, and it is the V.C. would not have decided Ashton v. Corriyan the consent of Hewetson, in the possession, order, sidered. Mellish, L.J., based his decision princi: without considering its effect on the earlier cases, and on the authority of that case he should hold sub-sect. 5 of sect. 15 of the Bankruptcy Act been discharged the property remained under the

or disposition of Malley, the reputed owner, within' pally upon the fact that as the receiver had not that specific performunce of the agreement was the proper remedy, and not sale. Leave would be with costs. 1869. I therefore make the order asked for, and protection of the court, and the proceedings for

liquidation were thus still pending. I am afraid given to amend, and the costs would be reserved.

I have hardly such substantial ground to go on; On the 10th Feb, the case came on again, when specific performance was decreed, and costs were

Friday, Feb. 27.

but the composition was payable by instalments

extending over twelve months. By the 126th allowed to the plaintiff.

(Before J. F. COLLIER, Esq., Judge.)

section of the Bankruptcy Act 1869, it is provided E parte BOLLAND; Re LUND.

that the provisions of any composition may be Bankruptcy Act 1869, rule 292—Cosis of proceed enforced by the court on a motion made in a sumBANKRUPTCY LAW. ings under an abortive composition arrangement mary manner by any person interested. This - When are the proceedings pending?

being so, can it be said that the proceedings are COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.

Held that an extraor;linary resolution to accept a absolutely dead until the composition has been

composition which is duly registered, and the paid ? But if they are not dead they are pending. Monday, March 2.

como osition unpaid when due, still leaves the The court still has cognisance of the matter, (Before Sir J. Bacon, Chief Judge.)

court with jurisdiction over the debtor, and Again, if a composition is not paid, the original Er parte JACOBS, Re CARTER.

therefore, where bankruptcy supervenes, the debts may be recovered in full by action at law, Proof-Secured creditor-Production of securities. proceedings are pending, and the solicitor for or, in the alternative, the better opinion seems to This was an appeal from the decision of the Bir- the debtor under the composition petition is be, though this, I believe has not been actually mingham County Court upon a point of some

entitled to his costs out of the bankrupt's estate. decided--a creditor may ask for an adjudication little importance in practice-whether it is neces- The facts of this case are fully set forth in the on the act of bankruptcy committed by filing the sary at the first meeting of a bankrupt's creditors, judgment.

petition; but if this is so, if the creditors may under the Bankruptcy Act 1869, to produce bills

T. H. James, instructed by Bellringer, sup- revert to the petition, if anything is in action of exchange and other securities, the particulars ported the order for costs.

by means of which the creditors may resort to of which are scheduled to the proofs of creditors. Blyburgh, instructed by Duncari, Hill and further proceedings, can the prooeedings in the De Gex, Q.C. and Finlay Knight, were counsel Dickenson, opposed.

composition be said to have come to an end ? I for the appellant.

His Honour said.—The motion in this case is think, although I acknowledge the matter is not Rochurgh, Q.C. and Horton Smith, for the that the court should order the trustee in bank- free from doubt, that, upon the construction respondents.

ruptcy of the estate of Thomas Lund to pay to which ought to be put upon the 292nd rule, they The facts of the case appeared to be that at Mr. John Leigh, an attorney, the amount of his most be held to be sufficiently alive to enable the the first meeting, held on the 19th Jan., Mr. taxed costs in the matter of a petition for liquida- solicitor in the composition to have his costs paid. Registrar Chauntler presided, when Mr. T. S. tion or composition, filed by the said Thomas For these reasons I think that Mr. Leigh is enSmith, the holder of a proxy of the Worcester Lund in the County Court of Lancashire holden at titled to have these costs out of the estate. On City and County Banking Company (Limited), Blackburn. The facts are these : On the 22nd the question by whom they should be taxed, I tendered a proof on their behalf for £2301, for Aug. 1972, Thomas Lund filed a petition for have come to the conclusion that the taxation money lent to the bankrupt by the company, and liquidation or composition in the Blackburn ought to be conducted in the Liverpool Court. for interest, commission, and other banker's County Court. The first meeting of creditors The trustee in bankruptcy has to pay them out charges, and the proof stated that the bank had was held on the 17th Sept., at which a resolu. of the bankrupt's estate ; he is responsible to the received no security or satisfaction for that sum tion was duly passed to accept a composition creditors in bankruptcy; the proceeding is in other than a mortgage or charge upon a messuage, of 103. in the pound in instalments extending bankruptcy, not in composition; the bankruptcy therein described and thereby assessed at the over a period of twelve months. That resolution is in the Liverpool Court; and I think the taxa. value of £740, and the bill of exchange and was confirmed at a second meeting, and the two

tion should be in the court in which the bank. promissory notes, particulars of which were set together formed the extraordinary resolution re- ruptcy is pending. The costs will come out of forth in the form prescribed by the Act, but the quired by the Act. The resolutions were duly the estate. bills themselves were not produced. The proof registered. The debtor proved unable to pay was objected to on the ground of the non-produc- the first instalment. Another meeting of credi. tion of the bills, and the Registrar overruled the

Re A. TAPPENBECK AND CO. tors was called on the 1st Nov., under the 126th objection. Application was then made to the section of the Bankruptcy Act 1869, to vary

Rejection of proof. judge by the counsel for the debtor, when the the previous resolution, but no resolution was In this case judge ordered that the proof should stand ad. | passed. Mr. Leigh was the attorney employed in

His HONOUR said:-This matter comes before mitted. Mr. Jacobs, on whose behalf the objec. and about the affairs of the debtor up to the me on an application to vary or reverse the deci. tion had been taken, appealed.

registration, and to him the registration of the sion of the trustee of the ostate of Augustus The CHIEF JUDGE said the practice in bankruptcy resolutions was entrusted by the creditors. On Tappenbeck and Co., rejecting a proof for £300. had been established for many years. A creditor the 28th Nov. a petition was filed by a creditor The following are the facts :-Åbout the beginning coming to prove his debt, who had a bill of ex. who had pot assented to the composition, that the of the year 1873, Mr. Augustus Tappenbeck and change or other security, ought to produce it. debtor should be adjudicated a bankrupt, the act Mr. A. L. Christiansen carried on business as That he was bound to produce his security before of bankruptcy alleged being the filing of the merchants in Liverpool, under the style of the receipt of dividend was quite another thing. original petition for liquidation or composition. Augustus Tappenbeck and Co. On the 15th Feb. There might be cases in which, from some acci- The debtor was adjudicated a bankrupt on this in the same year, the same two persons established dent, a creditor seeking to prove could not pro. act of bankruptcy on the 9th Dec., and on the the firm of Augustus Christiansen and Co., in duce his securities. In such cases the judge 30th the proceedings in the bankruptcy were Para, in Brazil. The two firms, although conwould exercise his discretion. Here the bank was removed into the Liverpool court. Under these sisting of the same persons, carried on different the holder of the bills, and there was no shadow circumstances Mr. Leigh claims his costs, as businesses. The firm in Brazil bought produce on of a reason why they should not be produced. taxed by the registrar of the Blackburn court, account of the firm in Liverpool, and shipped it to The order of the court below would be dis. from the trustee in bankruptcy. The 292nd rule them. The Liverpool house traded in the goods, charged.

provides that where bankruptcy occurs pending but the Brazil house received commission only.

[ocr errors]

Messrs. Nash, Ferreira, and Co., another firm to give guarantees in the name of his firm ; pressing his wish or intention to withdraw from carrying on business at Para, having occasion to thirdly, that the money-the subject of proof- it, and received in reply the following form of make remittances to England, were in the labit was not borrowed by J. M. Wike, in the name of petition to the society, to be presented by him to of buying bills of exchange drawn by Christiansen or for the purposes of the firm ; and, fourthly, the Master of the Bench : and Co. on Tappenbeck and Co., and payable to that Mr. Keighley, sen., the plaintiff in the case, “That your petitioner is desirous that his name Nash, Ferreira, and Co., and remitting them after was aware of that fact. Now, he was asked to may be taken off the books of this society, as he is endorsement to their correspondents Messrs. grant a re-hearing, not on the first point, which not now practising at the Bar, and it is his inten. Shaw, Hawkes, and Co., of Birmingham. Several was a point of law, and, he supposed, could not be tion not to practise as a barrister in futuro either bills were thus treated, and were accepted by disputed-nor upon the third and fourth points ; | in this country or in any of the colonies. Your Tappenbeck and Co., and paid at maturity | but upon the second, because evidence had come petitioner therefore prays your Worship will be among others, the following three bills, viz., one to the knowledge of the plaintiff since the former pleased to take his name off the books cf the drawn on the 7th April for £100, and two on 5th | trial, showing that in point of fact Mr. Geo. Wike society, and order the bond to be cancelled on May for £200 and £100 respectively. On the 1st had given an authority, either express or implied, payment of all his arrears of dues and duties to May 1873, Christiansen and Co. admitted into to his son, J. M. Wike, to give the guarantee the treasurer and the fine on leaving, within one partnership in the Brazil house one Mr. Schramm. upon which this action was brought. He (the month from the date of the order made hereon.A deed of partnership was executed, a circular in Judge) regretted exceedingly that this question, Since the time when this petition was sent to the usual form was issued, and, as Mr. Chris. which was of considerable importance, had been him, the terms thereof, as now required to be tiansen says, circulated in the commercial com- | left in the first instance to his decision. The signed by members of the society desirous of munity of Para. Moreover, he swears that he power of granting a re-hearing was one which withdrawing therefrom, have been altered by the himself told Mr. Ferreira, Mr. Nash's partner, of ought to be exercised with extreme caution. At addition of the word "India" after “colonies," the admission of Schramm. Schramm had nothing common law, unless the plaintiff could show and by the substitution of the word “com. to do with the Liverpool house. On the 17th June, ** surprise,” it was never exercised. In this case position” for the word fine," by which & bill for £200, and on the 17th July a bill for £100, there seemed to be no ground whatever for sug latter alteration, as the plaintiff believed, the were drawn in the usual way by Christiansen gesting surprise on the part of the plaintiff, Masters of the Bench of the society meant to and Co., on Tappenbeck and Co. in favour of because the question from beginning to end was assert more plainly the right of retaining, if they Nash and Co., endorsed by them to Shaw, whether or not the firm was bound by the trans- think fit, upon their books for the term of his Hawkes, and Co., and remitted to the latter action of J. M. Wike. The question here was, life, the name of any one who might have been firm. These bills were in the handwriting of what was the authority of J. M. Wike? If he called to the Bar by the society. The plaintiff Schramm, who at that time was the only partner had authority there was an end of the matter; if signed the above petition, and shortly afterwards at Paris. They were duly presented for accep not, then the decision must be the other way. he received the following order, dated the 15th tance about twenty-five or thirty days after they Apart from the question of surprise, the motion was Dec. 1869 : were drawn, but by the time the first one reached made under the 71st section of the Act, which gave “Upon the petition of Charles Neate, a barrister England Tappenbeck and Co. had filed their peti- him (the Judge) power to "renew, rescind, or of this society, praying that his name may be tion in liquidation, and the bills were not accepted. vary. any order previously made.' Upon what taken off the books, as he is not now practising at Shaw, Hawkes and Co. now seek to prove on the principle was that section to be worked out ? The the Bar, and it is his intention not to practise as a estate of Tappenbeck and Co. for the amount of power which it gave must be cautiously exercised. barrister in future either in this country or in any these bills. Their claims are advocated on two This was not a case in which there had been a of the colonies, it is ordered accordingly, and that grounds, which, it may be observed, are inconsis. failure of justice through inadvertence; it was his bond be cancelled on paying all his arrears of tent with one another. First, it is said that substantially an application for a new trial upon dues and duties and the customary fine to the Christiansen and Co., who drew the bills, were new facts. If he were to grant such an applica- treasurer of this society within one month from in reality identical with Tappenbeck and Co., and tion, where would the matter end? Within what the date hereof, or this order to be void.” Mr. Nash said that his firm purchased the bills limits was that kind of discretion to be exer. The plaintiff did not, in fact, pay the amount of on that belief and understanding. It is unneces.

cised ? How long after a case had been decided dues then owing by him to the society within the sary to consider what might have arisen from this were parties to be allowed to come forward and month allowed by the order, and so lost the state of things if it existed, because in fact it did say, “Oh, since the case was decided we have benefit thereof, and he continued to be, and was not exist. The admission of Mr. Schramm, before discovered new facts; we are prepared to lay an now, a member of the society. The plaintiff the bills were drawn, was known to Nash and Co. entirely new case before the court, and we desire stated by his bill that he was now indebted to the through one of their partners, Mr. Ferreira, and it to be re-opened ?” That was a practice which society in the sum of £23 11s. for dues and that disposes at once, I think, of the supposition he, for one, would never be a party to. As this charges. In July 1873 the defendants, the Hon. that Tappenbeck and Co. were liable as the was a matter in the discretion of the court, he was R. Denman and the Hon. G. Denman, as executors drawers of the bills, for that is what the argu- bound to say that, there being no justification for of the late Lord Denman (the surviving obligee ment must come to, and that in fact is what Mr. this motion on the ground of surprise, he did not of the bond), sued the plaintiff at law for the Nash says was his belief. Next it is alleged that think it was a case in which, having reference to amount. They did so, as the plaintiff alleged, by Christiansen and Co. were the agents of Tappen all the circnmstances, he should be justified in the direction of Lord Justice James, as treasurer beck and Co. As I said before, this status of granting a re-hearing. The motion must there of the society. The plaintiff offered to pay the Christianeen and Co. is inconsistent with the fore be dismissed.

£23 11s., but, wishing to cease to be a member of former one; for if Tappenbeck and Co. and Chris.

the society, desired at the same time to have the tiansen and Co. were the same persons, and both

bond delivered up to him. The society, however, firms, as was argued, principals, they could not

LEGAL NEWS.

declined to release him till he had signed a be one another's agents. But I have no objection

declaration of intention according to the “altered” to consider this argument, which amounts to this :

form of petition already referred to. The bill Christiansen and Co. were Tappenbeck's agents,

BARRISTERS v. THE INNS OF COURT.

then stated that the plaintiff refused to make any and as such had authority to contract, and did A CASE of Neate v. Denman was decided by Vice. such declaration of intention as that which was contract, on behalf of Tappenbeck and Co., that Chancellor Hall on the 26th ult., which is of the required of him by the terms of the altered they, Tappenbeck and Co., would accept these utmost importance to barristers as upholding the petition, because it would be a restraint upon his bills. But there is no evidence of any sach agency, absolute and arbitrary jurisdiction of the Inns of using any right that he might otherwise have by authority, or contract. All we have is that Court over persons who become members of the law of practising as a barrister without being a Tappenbeck and Co. did previously accept similar societies. We take the following report from the member of Lincoln's Inn or of some other similar bills, and that Nash and Co. bought the bills on Times :

society, and because such declaration was evithe faith that Tappenbeck and Co. were responsi.

The plaintiff in this case was Charles Neate, dently intended to assert for the Inn, or the ble ; but this is very far from being sufficient to Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford, and a barrister Masters of the Bench of it, the right of imposing establish a contract between Tappenbeck and Co. at-law of Lincoln's Inn. The defendants were such restrictions; that the making of such and Nash and Co. I am therefore of opinion that the Hon. Richard Denman and the Hon. George declarations a condition of withdrawal from the this proof was rightly rejected, and I dismiss the Denman, the executors of the late Lord Denman, Inn was contrary to public policy, and, therefore, motion with costs. As the circumstances re.

and the Right Hon. Sir William Milbourne James, illegal, as restricting the plaintiff or any person specting Mr. Goodley's proof are precisely the the Treasurer of the Society of Lincoln's Inn. making the same from practising in any part of same, the same decision will apply to both. The cause came on to be heard upon a demurrer the United Kingdom; that such condition was,

Wolton, instructed by Hull and Co. appeared to the plaintiff's bill for want of equity. The further, contrary to public policy as inter. for Mr. Banner, the trustee.

facts of the case were these :--The plaintiff, in fering with the right which our colonies or some Butler and James, instructed by Tyndall, for 1832, being a member of Lincoln's Inn, was then of them had or claimed to have of regula. the claimants.

called by that society to the decree of utter ting the practice of their own courts; that

barrister. He signed the usual bond, with a the Society of Lincoln's-inn was and claimed to be MANCHESTER COUNTY COURT.

surety to secure the payment of his dues to the a private association, and, as such, claimed to

society. The condition of the bond was this :- exercise the uncontrolled right of admitting whom Tuesday, March 3.

"That if the plaintiff should, from time to it pleased to be members thereof, and adminis(Before J. A. RUSSELL, Q.C., Judge.) time, and at all times thereafter during his life, tering or allowing the Masters of the Bench to KEIGYLEY v. MURRAY (TRUSTEE); Re WIKE or so long as he should continue a member of the administer, without publicity or accountability to AND Son.

Society of Lincoln's Inn, duly and orderly per. any but themselves, the funds and property Bankruptcy Act 1869Re hearing. form, pay, and discharge all such debts, duties, belonging to or held in trust for the society; that Application for re-hearing on the ground that and charges, sum and sums of money as should the society had at different times repudiated and

fresh evidence had been discovered since former grow due and chargeable upon him for pensions, successfully resisted the right of the Court of hearing, referred by Chief Judge in Bankruptcy preacher duties, commons, taxes, fines, penalties, Queen’s Bench to interfere with their proceedings to County Court Juilge.

amerciaments, and all other duties whatsoever by the process of mandamus, which right the Application refused, there being no ground for thereafter to be due or imposed upon him by Court of Queen's Bench would undoubtedly have suggesting • surprise,” and the question being virtue of any order or orders of the said society if the society were a body corporate or politic, or one in the discretion of the court under the 71st theretofore made, or at any time or times there otherwise claiming to exercise or to possess any section of the Bankruptcy Act.

after to be made, or by virtue of or according to public function or character ; that, even supposing Ambrose, barrister, in support of the motion. the usage and custom of the said society, then that such monopoly of conferring the right of Jordan, barrister, against.

this obligation to be void, or else to remain in full admission to the Bar might in somo other form be The facts of the case sufficiently appear from force and virtue."

useful and desirable, it was, nevertheless, conthe judgment.

In the year 1845 the plaintiff withdrew from trary to public policy that such a monopoly should His Honour, in giving judgment, said this practice at the bar, but from the time of his be enjoyed and made a source of revenue by case was originally tried before him on the 18th being called to the bar up to the year 1862 he a private and irresponsible association; that such July last year, and, after hearing the evidence continued from time to time to pay the whole of monopoly was in fact a source of revenue or and arguments thereon, he found as follows:- the amount claimed from him by the society, as pecuniary advantage to the society, and more First, that prima facie there is no authority in due up to the last-mentioned year, in respect of especially to the Masters of the Bench of it; that law for one partner to bind a firm by giving a any of the items mentioned in the and such no grant of such monopoly or of any share therein guarantee; secondly, that J. M. Wike had not, payments amounted to upwards of £60. In the was ever in fact made by any charter or letters in point of fact, any authority, express or implied, 'year 1869 the plaintiff wrote to the society ex. 'patent to the society; and that, even supposing

66

;

case

(which the plaintiff did not admit) that any such justify the interference of this court, as he pro- power of deciding such questions as the present. monopoly could be legally claimed on the ground posed; and if the court did grant him the relief If the plaintiff had no remedy by an appeal to the of prescription by a body corporate or politic, the he sought, it would not only be utterly without Judges, he might, and probably would have, a society, not having that character, and not being precedent, but would operate as a revolution of right to apply to the Court of Queen's Bench for or having been otherwise capable of receiving a the society which there was nothing to palliate or a mandamus. That, however, would be by reason grant in its collective capacity, was not capable of excuse.

of the fact that he had no other remedy. No case making a title to it by prescription ; that for the Neate, who appeared in his robes.—The points had been referred to in which the courts of equity reasons so stated the plaintiff was entitled to be which he intended to raise were these : That there have interfered between the Benchers of an inn discharged from his liability under the bond, and was a monopoly now enjoyed by the Inns of Court, of court and a member of the same society to to have the same delivered up to him or cancelled which depended entirely on the allowance of the restrain an action at law under such circumstances on paying to the defendants or to the society judges; that it was in the power of the judges to as the present. I consider that the judgments the dues incurred by him ap to the present admit other persons than members of an inn of in the cases of Reg. v. The Benchers of Lintime, which the plaintiff had already offered court to practise as barristers-for instance, those coln's Inn (ante), and Reg. v. Gray's Inn (ante), and thereby again offered to do on delivery or who had taken a degree in laws at the Univerities; although judgments of common law courts cancelling of the bond, and that he was further that the judges possessed that power under dele are binding on me and prevent my entertaining willing and thereby offered to pay all costs gation from the Crown, as appeared from Dugdale's any jurisdiction in this case. If there were hitherto incurred by the defendants, the Hon. * Origines Juridiciales” ; that the paper which no appeal to the Judges, there might be a right Richard Denman and the Hon. George Denman, the society required him to sign on leaving it was to a mandamus. I think I have no power to deal in the action at law; but that as to the composi intended to restrain him from using the liberty with this case, and that the bill in it is not well. tion required of him, in addition to tho dues, the which might be given by any alteration in the founded. It was said, however, that the claim to plaintiff desired to be informed of the amount of rules to be made by the judges, and was therefore have the bond delivered up would of itself confer such claim and the grounds thereof. The bill contrary to public policy.

an equity on the plaintiff. With reference to then, as originally framed, prayed a decree that The VICE-CHANCELLOR, having heard the plain. that, the rule of this court is, as Mr. Neate the defendants might make a full and true dis. tiff state & résumé of the arguments he proposed knows, that the court will not interfere if the covery and disclosure of and concerning all and to offer in support of his bill, said that if the invalidity of the instrument appears on the face singular the transactions and matters in the bill defendants' view was correct-viz., that this of it. A document is, on the face of it, either mentioned, and that in the meantime the defen- court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit-it legal or it is not. If it is illegal, it is inoperative, dants (the plaintiffs in the action at law), might would not only be waste of time, but improper to and there is, therefore, a valid defence at law be restrained by injunction from proceeding in the disouss, as he otherwise must do, the characters, with respect to it. If, on the other hand, it is action at law commenced by them against the constitutions, and powers of Lincoln's and other legal, but the circumstances are such that the plaintiff in this suit, and from commencing or similar societies. He wished the plaintiff, there. party cannot avail himself of them at law, then, prosecuting any other action or proceedings at fore, to confine his arguments to the preliminary if the case be as this is, one between a society law against the plaintiff in respect of or concern. question of jurisdiction.

and a member of it, with a proper forum to which ing the matters aforesaid, or any of them, and Neate upon that contended that the right of to appeal-viz., the Judges—this court ought not that the defendants, or such one or two of them every man now to enter into the service of the to interfere; and this court will not be induced as had the custody or disposal of the bond and public in any way he chose was much more fully to do so merely because the bill seeks the delivery petition, or either of them, might, on payment by recognised than it was formerly. The case of the up of the document. I may observe that it is not the plaintiff of the dues and costs and also of profession of a barrister was analogous. It was in every case that this court does interfere when the composition, if properly chargeable upon him, perfectly idle, therefore, to regard our Inns of it can. Its jurisdiction as to the delivery up and to the person or persons entitled to receive the Court as mere privato bodies, and as wholly and cancellation of documents is peculiar. It usually same, deliver up the bond and petition to the solely governed by what was called a domestio interferes in the instances of bills of exchange plaintiff. The bill (as amended during the jurisdiction. The Inns of Court were really pub. and promissory notes, because they may be nego. hearing at the bar) then prayed for a declaration lic bodies. Each was a corporation de son tort,"

tiable; but the considerations applicable to that the plaintiff was entitled to retire from the if he might so say. The defendants spoke of an

these cases do not affect that of a bond. I Society of Lincoln's Inn without giving any appeal to the Judges, but was there ever any case have recently had to consider that in undertaking not to practise as a barrister, and heard of-certainly none like the present-in

of Binns v. Fisher (17th Dec. 1873), without being subject to any condition against his which they had acted, or would be disposed to in which I held that the plaintiffs bad pot practising as a barrister, and without being liable act, in the manner now suggested ? He then sufficient equity to entitle them to have their to the payment of any fine or composition on his commented brieily on some of the authorities bond delivered up to them. On the whole of this retiring from the society.

cited on the other side. After a few observations case, I am of opinion that the plaintiff has failed Dickinson, Q.C., and Pemberton, for the defen. on the pleadings, and remarking that a Master of in establishing his right to the relief which he dants, supported the demurrer, and contended Arts of either University might be, and was a seeks. I have not made any observation on Mr. that there was no equity whatever in the plain- M.A., without being a member of the University, Neate's offer to pay the .£23 118., and his admistiff's case. They said, inter alia, that what he concluded by submitting that he was entitled to sion that he might have had, as he no doubt has really sought to obtain by his bill was the power the relief he prayed by his bill, and that the had, some benefit from being a member of this of practising, if he chose to do so, as a barrister, demurrer to it ought to be overruled.

society, such as the use of its library, and so without being also the member of an Inn of The VICE-CHANCELLOR said.—It appears to me

forth. He does not rest bis cage on that; and, if Court. But both law and castom were alike that I have no jurisdiction to try the question he had dono so, I think it would not have assisted opposed to that. To be a barrister, a man raised in this case. Mr. Neate, no doubt, is well him. Perhaps I should say that any relief he may must first become a member of an Inn of Court. aware of the difficulties which may arise between seek with respect to future actions against him The benchers of his inn, in due course called a member of an Inn of Court and the Inn itself he may embody in his appeal to the judges. His him to the Bar, The publication of the call with reference to the management of its property, case here really seems to me to be found in the to the Bar was by the benchers of the society, because he has commented on the case of Cun. amendment which was proposed to his billwho had, as benchers, no authority in court. The ningham v. Wegg (ante). He says that decision namely, the declaration that he is entitled to call was not to the bar of this or any other court, cannot be maintained. But sitting here as a Judge retire from the Society of Lincoln's-inn without but only to the Bar of the particular society. of First Instance, I could not do otherwise than giving any undertaking not to practise as a bar. That was a consequence of the moots or exercises follow it. However, I will express no opinion on ristor, and without being subject to any condi. which, in ancient times, were required from those that case ; for my judgment in the present one tion against his practising as one, and without who desired to attain the degree of a barrister does not depend on that case. The jurisdiction of being liable to the payment of any fine or compoat-law. If a man ceased to be a member of any this court, as well as that of a court of law, may sition on his retiring from the society. In concla. of the inns of court, he lost his right to practise in certain cases, and, indeed, must in some, be sion, I must hold that the demurrer must be as a barrister in the ordinary sense of the term. found to exist in respect of the management of allowed. The inns of court were private bodies. Their property, even although in such instances an Inn origin was, perhaps, obscure; but from time im- of Court may be parties to the litigation. Howmemorial they had the power of admitting ever, a case of property, in the strict sense of the THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF ENGLAND members or rejecting applicants for admission to term, is one with which I am not dealing on the

ON THE DUTIES OF A JUDGE. their own societies. They alope had the privilege present occasion. If it it were such a case, I In the course of his peroration in summing up of calling their own members to the Bar; and in should be found to follow Cunningham v. Wegg the Tichborne case Sir A. Cockburn said – We all matters of internal regulation and manage. (ante). This is a case in which the question is must remember that while it is the business of ment of their property and otherwise, the only between the plaintiff and the defendants, the judicial action to protect innocence, so, on the forum of appeal for the societies or their members, latter of whom may, for the purposes of this suit, other hand, it is the duty of the judge to take if aggrieved or at variance inter se, was to the be considered as representing the Society of care that the guilty do not escape. In the con. judges of the Superior Courts of England, as Lincoln's-inn. The question is simply and solely viction of the innocent and also in the escape of visitors of the societies. There had, indeed, as to the position and rights of the plaintiff as a the guilty lies, as the old saying says, the condem. been some

cases at common law in which member of the society. He voluntarily became a nation of the judge. It is the condemnation of the jurisdiction of the inns of court over member of it, and gave it a bond to pay certain the judges of the fact as well as of the judge who their members had come under discussion with dues during the whole of the time that he should presides at the trial. You must take care that respect to the issuing of a writ of mandamus, be and until he coased to continue a member of it. the innocent does not suffer, but you owe it to such as Cunningham v. Wegg (2 Brown's Ch. Cas. The condition of the bond contains no stipulations society that if guilt is brought home to the accused 211); Reg v. Gray's Inn (1 Douglas, 353); Reg. v.

as to the mode or circumstances by or under that guilt shall carry with it the consequences of Barnard's Inn (5 Ad. & Èll. 17); Reg. v. Lincoln's which he should cease to be a member of the the verdict. You have been asked, gentleman, Inn (4 Barn. & Cres. 858). But there never had society. That was left to the internal regulations to give the defendant the benefit of any doubts been any instance of the interference of a court of of the society itself, of which he had become, you may entertain. Most assuredly, it is your equity with the private and internal affairs of an and still is, a member. Therefore, in that staté duty to do so. It is the business of the prosecu. Inn of Court. The plaintiff's position then was, of things, the right to retire from the society tion to bring home guilt to the accused to the in equity, this: He had voluntarily joined a which the plaintiff claims is entirely a question satisfaction of the jury. But the doubt of which voluntary society, governed by rules of its own, between him and the society. He says he has a the accused is entitled to the benefit must be the to which he, as a member, had assented, and he right to retire. He does not say he has already doubt that a rational, that a sensible man may had given that society his bond, conditioned for retired and is not now a member, because if he had fairly entertain, not the doubt of a vacilla. the payment of certain money, which by his bill said that it would have been a defence to the ting mind that has not the moral courage to he admitted he owed, and for which he had been action at law. Ho says he made a proposal to the decide, but shelters itself in a vain and idle sued at law, and yet he sought to be discharged society to be allowed to retire from being a mem. scepticism. It is not a doubt of that kind; from such liabilities. No doubt he had ceased to ber of it, but that they refused to permit him to it must be a doubt which honest and conscien. practise, but he could not say he had not derived do so except on terms with which he says he is tious men can entertain. But, 'gentlemen, you some benefit from his having been a member of not bound to comply. That is a question entirely have been addressed in language the like of which the society. In conclusion, there was not any for the peculiar jurisdiction which has been re- has never before been heard within these walls. ground for his bill. He had not made out a case, ferred to in the arguments, and which has always You have been exhorted, if there should be one either of trust or of contract, of fraud, mistake, been recognised-namely, that of the Judges of man who might entertain any different opinion or account. There was absolutely nothing to the Superior Courts of England. They have the from the rest of his brother jurymer, that he

« EelmineJätka »