« EelmineJätka »
SITTINGS OF THE COURTS.
FOR THE WEEK ENDING SATURDAY, JAN. 23. Abergavenny, Monday, at 10
Longton,* Monday, at 9.30 Aberystwyth, Friday
Loughborough,* Friday, at 9.30 Abingdon, Friday, at 11
Louth, Thursday, at 10 Accrington, Thursday, at 9.30
Ludlow,* Wednesday, at 10 Altrincham,' Wednesday, at 10
Luton, Thursday Ashborne, Wednesday, at 10
| Macclesfield, * Tuesday Ashby-de-la-Zouch,* Thursday, at 11 Machynlleth, Saturday Ashton-under-Lyne, * Thursday
Manchester, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Attleborough, Friday, at 11
Friday, at 10 Axbridge, Wednesday, at 10
Market Bosworth,* Friday, at 12 Bacup, Tuesday, at 9
Market Rasen, Saturday, at 10 Bakewell, Tuesday, at 10
Marylebone, Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, Barnet, Wednesday
and Friday Barnsley, Tuesday and Thursday
Matlock, Thursday, at 10 Barrow-in-Furness, Wednesday, at 9.45 Middlesbrough,
onday, at 10 Bath, Thursday, and Friday (J.S. and B.), Midhurst, Thursday at 10
Mildenhall, Monday Bedford, Thursday, at 10
Morpeth, Monday, at 10 Biggleswade, Monday, at 10.30
Nantwich,* Monday Birkenhead,* Tuesday, at 10
Neath, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday Birmingham, Monday, Tuesday, Wednes- Newark, Monday, at 10
day, Thursday (A. and B.), and Friday, New Mills, Monday, at 10.30 at 10
Newport (Mon.), Thursday, at 10.30; Blackburn, Monday and Saturday, at 10 Friday, at 11 Blandford, Friday, at 10
Newtown, Thursday Bolton, Wednesday, at 9.30
Northallerton, Saturday, at 10 Bow, Monday and Friday
North Shields, Wednesday, at 10 Bradford (Yorks),* Tuesday, and Thurs- Norwich, Monday, Tuesday, and Wednes. day (R , Bky), at 10
day, at 10 Brentford, Friday, at 10
Nottingham, Tuesday, at 9.45; Wednesday Bridgwater, Friday, at 10
(A.0. at 9.45; Bky at 11.30) Brigg, Friday, at 10
Nuneaton,* Saturday, at 10 Brighton,* Thursday (Reg., Bky), at 11; Okehampton, Wednesday, at 10 Friday, at 10
Oldham, Thursday, at 9.30 Bristol, Thursday, at 10; Friday (Bky), Otloy,* Wednesday, at 9.45 at 11
Oxford, Thursday (Reg., Bky), and SaturBuilth, Monday
day (J.S.), at 11.30 Burnley, Thursday, at 10
Penzance, Tuesday, at 10 Bury, Monday, at 9
Wednesday and Friday Bury St. Edmunds, Tuesday
Pontypool, Wednesday, at 10 Cambridge, Wednesday (Reg., Bky), at 11 Pontypridd, Monday, Wednesday, and Carnarvon, Wednesday
Thursday Cheltenham, Thursday and Friday Porth, Friday Chesterfield, Friday, at 9.30
Portsmouth, Thursday, at 12 Chichester, Wednesday
Rodruth, Thursday, at 10 Chippenham, Wednesday, at 10
Romford, Monday, at 11 Clerkenwell, Monday, Tuesday, Wednes- St. Austell, Monday, at 10 day, Thursday, and Friday
Salford, Monds and Thursday, at 10 Clitheroe, Wednesday, at 9.45
Salisbury, Thursday, at 10 Colchester, Wednesday, at 11
Shaftesbury, Wednesday, at 11 Colne, * Friday, at 9.45
Sheffield, Wednesday and Thursday, at 10 Darlington, Wednesday, at 9
Shoreditch, Tuesday and Thursday Derby, Tuesday (Reg., Bky), at 10
Sittingbourne, Friday, at 10 Dereham, Thursday, at 11
Southampton, Tuesday, at 11 Dorer, Wednesday, at 10
Southwark, Monday, Tuesday, and ThurgDudley,* Tuesday, at 10
day, at 10.30 Durham, Monday and Tuesday, at 10 Spalding, Monday, at 11.30 Exeter,* Wednesday, at 10
Stalybridge,* Saturday Folkestone, Tuesday, at 10
Stockton-on-Tees, * Tuesday, at 9.30
Sunderland, Wednesday, Thursday, and Halifax, Tuesday (Reg.), at 10
Friday (Bky), at 10 Hanley,* Tuesday, at 9.30
Taunton, Thursday, at 10 Harwich, Thursday, at 12
Tiverton, Saturday, at 10 Hereford, Tuesday and Friday, at 10 Totnes, Tuesday, at 10 Holyhead, Tuesday
Towcester, Wednesday, at 10.30 Horsham, Tuesday, at 11
Tredegar, Tuesday, at 9.30 Huddersfleld, Wednesday, Thursday, and Truro, Friday, at 10.30; Saturday, at 11.30 Friday, at 10
Uxbridge, Tuesday Huntingdon, Wednesday, at 10
Wakefield, Tuesday, at 10 Hyde,* Wednesday
Walsall,* Thursday, at 10 Hythe, Monday, at 10.30
Wantage, Monday, at 10 Ipswich, Wednesday and Thursday, at 10; Warrington,* Thursday Friday (Reg., Bky), at 11
Watford, Monday Kendal, Tuesday, at 12
Wellington (Somerset), Monday, at 11 Kingsbridge, Monday, at 10.30
Wells, Tuesday, at 10 Lambeth, Thursday
Welshpool, Wednesday Lancaster, Friday, at 10
Westbromwich,* Wednesday, at 10 Langport, Wednesday, at 10
Westminstez, Monday, Tuesday, WednesLeeds, Monday, Wednesday, Thursday, day, Thursday, and Friday, at 11 and Friday, at 10
Weston-super-Mare, Monday, at 10 Leicester, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Weymouth, Monday, at 10 Thursday (Reg., Bky), at 10
Wigan," Tuesday, at 9.30 Leigh, Friday
Williton, Tuesday, at 12 Leominster,* Monday, at 10
Wimborne, Tuesday, at 10 Leyburn, Thursday, at 10.30
Winchcombe, Wednesday Liverpool, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Windsor, Friday
and Thursday, at 10; Friday (Bky and Wolverhampton,* Monday and Friday, Adm.), at 11
at 10 Llandudno, Thursday
Worcester, Wednesday and Thursday, Llanelly, Monday and Tuesday
at 10 Llanidloes, Tuesday
the cabin. The action, therefore, was in its nature an action of trespass for a wrong done to the possession of the plaintiff. A ship is personal property; the cabin, therefore, was personal property in possession of the plaintiff. It is conceded that simple possession is, irrespective of title, sufficient to entitle the possessor to bring an action of trespass for a wrong done to the chattel in his possession, or to the enjoyment or use of it while he possesses it. But it is contended that it must be an exclusive possession in order to enable the possessor to maintain the action even against a stranger. But it seems to me that the expression “exclusive possession” is equivocal, and that, as its meaning must vary according to the circumstances of each particular case, it must vary according to the relation which the person of whom it is spoken occupies with regard to the person in reference to whom it is spoken. I am not aware of any express decision upon the points raised in this case, and I presume there is none, or counsel for the defendant would have brought it to the notice of the court. He, however, relies upon the dicta of Blackburn, J. in Allan v. Overseers of Liverpool (30 L. T. Rep. 93 ; L. Rep. 9 Q. B. 192), and of Hill, J. in Smith v. St. Michael, Cambridge (30 L. J., M. Ca. 74; 3 E. & E. 383), in support of his argument ; but it seems to me Blackburn, J. was only stating a general proposition to illustrate the position of the adpellant in the case before him. It was necessary appellant should have exclusive occupation to render him liable to be rated to the poor rate for the premises occupied by him.
“He must be,” a person who, if there was a trespass committed on the premises (that is the premises rated) would be the person to bring an action of trespass for it;” and he illustrates this by showing that a lodger could not bring such an action, that is, for a trespass committed on the house in which he lodges, because he has only the exclusive use of certain rooms in the house, and the landlord is there for the purpose of being able to have his own servants to look after the house and the furniture, and has retained to himself the occupation, though he has agreed to give the exclusive enjoyment of the occupation to the lodger, and he explains that, in using the expression “ exclusive use,” he uses it in the sense that nobody else is to be there. This seems to afford the inference that, if anybody else but the landlord is there, the lodger may turn him out, or bring an action of trespass for the intrusion into his occupation or possession ; but Blackburn, J. refers to, and accepts, the decision in Smith v. St. Michael, Cambridge, to which he was himself a party, but the judgment was delivered by Hill, J., and the question for the consideration of the court was, whether the appellant was the occupier of the whole of the house for which he was rated, or whether five rooms and a closet in it were in the occupation of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue.
“ There is no doubt,” said the learned judge, “ that exclusive possession of a part only of a house may be given so as in effect to make the two parts of the house separate tenements.” Then the learned judge goes on to deal with the facts of the case, and, after dealing with them, says: “It is true the exclusive enjoyment of the rooms is to be given, but that is the case where a guest in an inn, or a lodger in a house, has a separate apartment, or where a passenger in a ship has a separate cabin, in which case it is clear that the possession remains in the innkeeper, lodginghouse-keeper, or shipowner." That must mean of the inn, house, or ship as a whole for the purpose of rateability, and goes to show, I think, that the meaning of Blackburn, J.'s dictum in Allan v. Over. seers of Liverpool is what I have ventured to impute to it, and this I think will be further shown if the dictum is read by the light of the remarks and judgment of the same learned judge in Reg. v. St. George University (L. Rep. 7 Q. B. 90). Mr. Horridge cited Nelson v. Chirville (1 Moo. & S. 452), which does not appear to touch the point. These cases, therefore, do not seem to me to touch the point which I have to decide, viz., whether the plaintiff in this action has such a possession of the cabin as enables him to maintain this action. In Harker v. Birbeck (3 Barr. 1563), which was an action for encroaching upon plaintiff's lead mine, Lord Mansfield laid it down: “Whoever is in possession may maintain an action of trespass against a wrong-doer to his possession.” It is obvious that Lord Mansfield is speaking of possession in fact. It is true that this is said of an action concerning land in which possession in fact is necessary for the maintenance of the action. So Graham v. Peat (1 East, 244) was an action for trespass to land, where Lord Kenyon says any possession is a legal possession against a wrong-doer; and it is true that in an action for trespass to personal property constructive possession may be sufficient to support the action. And it may be that the owners of the ship might have sued instead of the plaintiff in this action. But still these dicta are authorities to show what kind of possession (where the action is based, as in this case, on actual possession) is sufficient to maintain the action. It comes to this, that a bare possession is sufficient against a wrong-doer, because he, being a wrong-doer, and having no title, cannot question the plaintiff's title by possession. Then has the plaintiff a right to sue, or must he leave it to his employers to avenge his wrongs ? In Moore v. Robinson (2 B. & Adol. 817) it was held that the master of a flyboat, who is hired by a canal company at a weekly wage, can maintain an action for cutting a rope fastened to the vessel, whereby it was towed along an inland navigation, although the vessel and the rope were the property of the company. The case of Pitts 'v. Gardner (1 Salk. 10) was cited in support of the plaintiff's right of action, and the Court held that the plaintiff was interested with the management of the vessel and had a person under him—that the cases were not distinguishable. In Pitts v. Gardner (ubi sup.) the action was by the master for detention of a ship about to sail laden with corn for Dantzic. The form of action was trespass on the case, which was held to be the right form for recovery of special damages, but Holt, C.J. held that the plaintiff might have sued in trespass as a bailee of goods may, and then, as a bailee, he would only have declared upon his possession, viz., that he was possessed, which is sufficient to maintain trespass. These decisions seem to be strong authorities in
ACTION OF TRESPASS-TITLE OF PLAINTIFF. In the Birkenhead County Court, on the 8th Dec. last, before his Honour Judge Fioulkes and a jury, the case of Holland v. Willoughby was decided.
Thompson, of Liverpool, solicitor, for plaintiff ; and Horridge, barrister, for defendant.
His HONOUR gave judgment as follows :-In this action the plaintiff seeks to recover damages from the defendant for intruding into a cabin occupied by him on board the ship. The plaintiff was mate of the ship, and the captain was absent when the act complained of took place. It took place during the night when the plaintiff was in bed in a berth in
favour of the sufficiency of the possession of the plaintiff and of his right to sue in this action. In each case the property did not belong to the plaintiff, and poesession by their servants was constructively that of the owners, so that the owner in each case might have sued, yet the action by the master of the vessel was held maintainable. In the present case the plaintiff was in charge of the ship, the captain being absent, and was in fact in possession of the cabin. His position was analogous to that of a bailee of a chattel, whom Holt, C.J. held might sue in trespass for the wrong, as Lord Mansfield puts it, to his possession, in Harker v. Birbeck (ubi sup.). These cases, I think, are conclusive to show that, whatever rights the constructive possessor of a chattel may have, the possessor in fact may maintain an action of trespass for a wrong done to his possession by a wrong-doer, and in further support of this view there is the opinion of an eminent judge which is very apposite to this case in Lewis v. Ponsford (8 Car. & Payne 687). It was an action for breaking and entering the plaintiff's house, and pulling up a window, by means whereof the plaintiff, who was lying in bed undressed in a certain room of the house, caught cold and became ill. One of the issues raised by the pleadings was not possessed, and in leaving that issue to the jury, Denman, L.C.J., drew a distinction between the possession of the house and of a room in the house. He said : “ This is not an action for any personal violence to the plaintiff herself, nor for a trespass in entering her bedroom, for if it were the case might be very different, as I should be much inclined to hold that even a female servant was sufficiently owner of her bedroom as against a wrong-doer who forced herself into it in this way." I readily bow to the opinion of so eminent a judge, which, if I may be permitted to say so without disrespect, seems to me to be thoroughly consistent with common sense as well as most germane to the point under our consideration in this case. On the evidence there is no pretence for contending the defendant was not a wrong-doer. The police have most difficult duties to discharge-none, I dare say, more troublesome than those at night at the docks and quay-sides, and of course they, like other officials, are liable to make mistakes. It is not now disputed that the women who were the cause of defendant's suspicion on board were what they were represented to be, and it is a pity the defendant, when he found out his mistake, did not make an ample and honest apology. I think, on the authority of the cases I have referred to, that the plaintiff had sufficient possession to maintain this action, and had a right to bring it. I give leave to appeal on condition that the damages and costs are paid into court before notice of appeal, and within a week from this day.
debtors. Recently the chapel was the place at which mortgagees or their representatives were ordered to wait for an hour, or sometimes for two hours, before proceeding to foreclosure. A representative of the Public Record Office had to be present, and the fees received by him for such attendances went to the credit of the department; but this anomalous system ended in December 1889, when the Lord Chancellor agreed to the substitution of a room in the Royal Courts of Justice for the Rolls Chapel as the trysting place for mortgagors and mortgagees. “ Two years later, it was enacted that the yearly payment of £225 for the expenses of the Rolls Chapel. which had been charged upon the Consolidated Fund in 1837, but which had in recent years been defrayed out of the Parliamentary Vote for Civil Services, should altogether cease on the next vacancy in the preachership. The House of the Converts from Judaism bad long since disappeared; the Master of the Rolls had eurrendered his official estate to the Crown, and had furthermore severed his connection with the Chancery on becoming a judge of the Court of Appeal; and the Masters in Chancery had been abolished. There was therefore no normal congregation on Sundays, and the number of strangers attending morning prayer was rarely more than five, while it was often two or even one. No service has been performed in the chapel since the Long Vacation of 1895.” The appendix proceeds : “ The result of successive repairs and alterations at the Rolls Chapel was that, seven years ago, there was not a particle of mediæral work visible within or without. The inner roof was of lath and plaster, put up about forty years ago, and the inner walls were lined throughout with plaster. The external walls were covered with a thin layer of flint, except in places where there were patches of comparatively modern brick, stone, and stucco. The buttresses had been removed or mutilated, and the four large windows were devoid of tracery. Altogether it was a mean and ugly building, entirely without architectural merit, and interesting mainly on account of its monuments and its panels of stained glass. Even these could not be properly seen, the former being in the eastern part of the chapel, which was very dark on the brightest day in summer, and the best glass being high up in the western window.
“In 1889, the house known as 1, Rolls-yard, which adjoined the south side of the chapel, was demolished, and the removal of it disclosed some features of which the existence was not previously known. Further operations were carried on in 1895, with a view to finding mediaval re. mains, and ascertaining what portions, if any, of the structure could be retained. The Act of 1837, already quoted, clearly contemplated a possible demolition of the chapel, and in the plans for the Public Record Office made by Sir James Pennethorne in 1850, the whole site of the chapel had been allocated to rooms intended to serve as repositories of documents. On farther consideration, however, it was thought that it might be possible to incorporate the chapel in the new block of the Public Record Office, removing only the roof, which, being made of wood, could not be permitted to form part of a building which had to be fire-proof. A design was accordingly prepared for erecting massive piers on the south side of it, which would have allowed the old wall to show between them. There are at least two precedents for such a course, one at Southampton, where a Norman house was incorporated in the town walls of the 14th century, the other at Rimini, where the walls and windows of a mediæval church show under the Renaissance arches erected by Alberti for Sigismondo Malatesta. This scheme was, however, abandoned when it was found that the old walls were thoroughly rotten, stonework and mortar having alike decayed
The rubble walls were, in fact, rent with long fissures, and there was no architectural work that could be "restored' without being altogether re-made, mostly from entirely new designs. Under these cir. cumstances, the First Commissioner of Works decided, with great reluctance, that the chapel should be pulled down. Special treatment will, however, be given to that portion of the new building which will occupy its site, and the old monuments and stained glass will be refixed therein."
Following this is a detailed account of the structure, which, the DeputyKeeper remarks, could not have been written if the walls had not been demolished. A number of illustrations are also given, but it is explained that these do not represent the state of the chapel at any one date, and are intended mainly in order to render the account intelligible.
THE NEW CHANCERY JUDGE. We are officially informed, says the St. James's Gazette of Thursday, that the Queen has approved the appointment by the Lord Chancellor of Mr. E. W. Byrne, Q.C., M.P. for the Walthamstow Division of Essex, as one of the judges of the High Court of Chancery. The Lord Chancellor's messenger waited upon Mr. Byrne this afternoon, with, it is assumed, Her Majesty's sanction for his appointment.
Mr. Edmund Widdrington Byrne is the eldest son of Mr. Edmund Byrne, a solicitor, of Westminster. The new judge was born in 1844, and is, therefore, fifty-three years of age. Educated at King's College School, and King's College, London, he entered as a student
of Lincoln's-inn in November 1863, being then nineteen years of age. He was called to the Bar in 1867, and in 1888 was appointed Q.C. For some years Mr. Byrne has been a leader in Mr. (now Lord) Justice Chitty's court, and when the appointment of Mr. Justice Chitty as a Lord Justice of Appeal was announced at the New Year, his name was mentioned as a probable successor to his Lordship. The new judge is a Bencher of Lincoln's-inn, a member of the Bar Committee since its foundation, and of the General Council of the Bar. He had not previously sat in Parliament until his election as member for Walthamstow in 1895.
The appointment of Mr. Byrne to the vacant judgeship will necessitate a Parliamentary bye-election in the South-West, or Walthamstow, Division of Essex. At the General Election in 1895 Mr. Byrne, who is a Unionist, defeated the Radical candidate, Mr. A. J. H. Pollen, by a majority of 2353. In 1892 Mr. Byrne's majority was 1150; and in 1886 Col. Makins, the Conservative candidate, obtained a majority of 1822. The seat may, therefore, be regarded as perfectly safe for the Unionists.
THE ROLLS CHAPEL. The most interesting part of the 57th annual report of the Deputy-Keeper of the Public Records for the year 1895, which has just been issued, is contained in an appendix respecting the Rolls Chapel. It shows that the chapel was originally that of the House of Converts, which was founded by Henry III. for the reception of Jews who had embraced the Christian faith, and the earliest specific reference to that house occurs in a Royal charter, dated the 16th January 1232, by which the founder assigned a yearly sum of 700 marks for the maintenance of the inmates, " and for the construction of their church and their buildings." Tbree months later ho made provision for two chaplains celebrating Divine service in the chapel which he had caused to be erected for the use of the converts, showing that the building had then at any rate been begun. The account which the appendix proceeds to give of the subsequent history of the chapel shows that the edifice was used, not only for Divine worship, but also for the preservation of the records of Cbancery ; while it bad, also, a third character, inasmuch as it was a meeting-place for creditors and
LAWYERS' WILLS IN 1896. The largest estate, says the St. James's Gazette of any member of the Legal Profession reported last year was that of Sir William Robert Grove, F.R.S., eighty-five, author of The Correlation of the Forces," Justice of Common Pleas 1871-75, and a judge of the High Court 1875-87, who left personal estate to the amount of £215,900. Lord Blackburn of Killearn, eithty-two, Lord of Appeal 1876-86, left in personalty £139.965; the Hon. George Denman, seventy-six, M.P. for Tiverton 1859-72, Justice of Common Pleas 1872-75, and a judge of the High Court 1875-92, £12,283 : Sir Robert Stuart, eighty, formerly Chief Justice of the North-West Pro. vinces of India, £13,420; aud Henry Tullic Rivaz, forty-six, judge at Lahore, £1427. Amongst other wills noticed were those of five County Court judges, namely : His Honour Thomas Ellison, seventy-seven, Sheffield, £9006; his Honour Henry Holroyd, seventy-six, Southwark and Wandsworth, £21,725 ; his Honour William Digby Seymour, seventythree, also Recorder of Newcastle-on-Tyne and formerly M.P. for Sunderland and for Southampton, £5234; his Honour Thomas Hughes, seventytwo, Chester, formerly M.P. for Lambeth, author of “ Tom Brown's Schooldays,” £5079 : bis Honour George Washington Heywood, fifty-four, Manchester, £22,853. The Hon. Slingsby Bethell, sixty-five, Reading Clerk and Clerk of Private Committees of the House of Peers, left personalty the gross value of £1
12. The wills were reported of George Parker Bidder, Q.C , fifty-nine, £25,904 ; Richard Searle, Bencher of the Middle Temple, £25,820 ; George Godfrey Farrant, of the Inner Temple,
of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. J. B. Simpson. Bradley Hall, Wylam-on-Tyne, the liquidator of the company.
Dues and Thompson, Newsastle-upon-Tyne, solicitors for the liquidator. SILVER KANDY (CEYLON) TEA COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Feb. 20,
their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Messrs. R. A. Gartside and F. Harrison, 67, Princess-st, Manchester, the liquidators of the company.
CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY.
LAST DAY OF PROOFS. MOORE (Nathan), formerly of Quirry Gap Farm, Laisterdyke, Bradford, Yorkshire,
farmer. Jan. 23; E. Lee, Registrar of the Yorkshire County Court, holden at Bradford. Jan. 25; the Registrar aforesaid, at eleren o'clock.
£94,894; James Langworthy, Prince's-gardens, £105,471 ; and Francis Hobson Appack, Elcot Park, Berks, £241,600 ; but this last-named amount was, no doubt, not entirely earned at the Bar.
Amongst the wills of solicitors noticed last year were those of Charles Bischoff, ninety-four (Bischoff, Coxe, and Bompas), London, £29,118 ; Isaac Sheffield, ninety-four (Sheffield and Sons), London, gross, £6194 ; Henry Piper, ninety-three, formerly ward clerk, and for seventy years a ratepayer of Aldersgate, £3106 ; Richard Toller, ninety, Leicester, the oldest Clerk of the Peace in England, £15,295 ; William Sextus Harding, eighty-nine, Birmingham, £61,709 ; Isaac Oliver Jones, eighty-four (Oliver Jones, Billson, and Co.), Liverpool, £15,271 ; Alexander Forbes Tweedie, seventy (A. F. and R. W. Tweedie), Lincoln's-inn-fields, £2911; Frederick John Blake, seventy (Wordsworth and Blake), Threndneedle-street, £20,434 ; Richard Shelton, sixty-five, London and Wolverhampton, £123,273 ; Robert Fowler, sixty-five, Victoria-street, one of the pro. motors of the Salt Union Limited, gross, £7687; William Bristow, sixtytwo, solicitor to the Greenwich Hospital Department and vestry clerk of Greenwich, £530; Horatio Noble Pym, fifty-one, Old Jewry, residuary legatee of the estate in France of Mrs. Lyne-Stephens, £102,470. The personalty of George Menzies Clements, of Gresham-house and St. Pancras, was valued at £25,782 ; that of Thomas Brian Mellersh, of Godalming, where, and at Guildford, members of his family had been solicitors and bankers since 1814, amounted to £13,023; that of George Henry Sawtell, seventy-three (Bridges, Sawtell, and Co.), to £6590; and that of Robert Fitz Finnis, forty-eight (Wylie and Finnis), vesty clerk of Chiswick, to £2647. Charles Marryat Elborough, forty-nine, town clerk of Croydon, president of the Society of Clerks of the Peace, left personal estate of the value of £1098; William Thoms McGowen, eighty-one, town clerk of Bradford, £6223 ; and Sir George William Morrison, forty-five, late town clerk of Leeds, £2116.
UNCLAIMED STOCK AND DIVIDENDS IN THE BANK OF
ENGLAND. Transferred to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, and which
will be paid to the persons respectively whose names are prefixed to each in three
months from the date given, unless other claimants sooner appear.] CARROWAY (Mary Jane), 13, Park-st, Deal, Kent, widow. £107 is. 8d. £2 15s, per
Cent. Consolidated Stock, late Consolidated Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimant,
Henry James Caspell, sole executor of the said M. J. Carroway. Jan. 9. Low (Caroline Ann), Swiss-villa, Netley-rd, Southsea, Hants, widow. L255 13s. 11d.
12 155. per Cent. Consolidated Stock. late New Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimants, Edwin Low and Charles Cecil Becke, executors of the said C. A. Low,
deceased. Jan. 12 LYNXE (Spencer), 4, Lansdowne-cres, Cheltenham, gentleman ; and LYNNE (Gwendo
Jine), à minor. £135 178. 8d. £2 158. per Cent. Consolidated Stock, late Consoli
dated Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimant, said S. Lynne. Jan. 9. LYNNE (Spencer), 4, Lansdowne-cres, Cheltenham; and LYNNE (Muriel Margaret), a
minor. £135 178. 8d. £2 158. per Cent. Consolidated Stock, late Consolidated
Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimant, said S. Lynne, Jan. 9. Suita (Mary), Laburnam-cottage, Bath-rd, Heston, Hounslow, spinster. £25. £2 15s.
per Cent. Consolidated Stock, late New Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimants, Sarah Salmon, spinster, and Nathan Salmon, executors of Frederick Salmon, deceased, who was sole executor of the said J. Smith, deceased. Jan. 9.
HEIRS-AT-LAW AND NEXT OF KIN. CURR (Rer. Edward), Clontuskert Rectory. Ballinasloe, Galway, Ireland, clerk in holy
orders, who died at Upham. Bishop Waltham, Hampshire, on July 26, 1896. His next of kin or any other person haring any claims upon his estate to send in, by Feh. 8, the particulars of their claims to Messrs. Eardley, Holt, Hulbert, and Hubbard, solicitors, 28, Charles-st, St. James's-sq.
CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. C. 35.
LAST DAY OF CLAIM AND TO WHO PARTICULARS TO BE SENT. ARNOLD (Mary Ann), 19, Bulrerhithe-ri, Hastings, Sussex, widow, formerly of 5,
Millwood-rd, Hastings. Feb. 27; W. C. Cripps and Sons, solicitors, Tunbridge
Wells, Kent. ABRAHAMS (Michael), 21, Chester-ter, Regent's Park, and of 8. Old Jewry, solicitor.
March 1; Michael Abrahams, Sons, and Co., solicitors, 8, Old Jewry. BEAMER (Caroline Jane). 46, Carlton-rd, Birkenhead, Cheshire, widow. March 10;
J. F. Harrison and Burton, solicitors, 52, Castle-st, Liverpool. BUSSELL (Thomas), Fern Tower, Caterham Valley, Surrey, and of 73, Queen
Victoria-st, manufacturer and warehouseman. Feb. 12; Phelps, Sidgwick, and
Biddle, solicitors, 22, Aldermanbury. BEWLEY (George William). Camden Villa, Cranbrook, Kent, late captain in Her
Majesty's army. Feb. 21; White, Borrett, and Co., solicitors, 6, Whitehall-pl. BRIGIT (Sir Robert Onesiphorus), Normandy Park, Warplesdon, Surrey, general in
Her Majesty's Army and a u.O.B. Marchl; Wansey and Son, solicitors, 2, St.
Stephen's-chmbrs, Baldwin-st, Bristol. BELFIELD (John Finney), formerly of Primley-hill, Paignton, Devonshire, late of 32,
Courtfield grdns, South Kensington. Feb. 18; A. Beltleld, solicitor, 2, New-inn,
Strand. BROWN (Maria Elizabeth), 17, Princess-rd, Selhurst, Surrey, widow. March 1;
E. Dean, solicitor, 5, Clement's-inn, Strand. BROWN (William Tod), 3, Trefusis ter, Exmouth, major-general, C.B. Feb. 6; Ford,
Harris, and Ford, solicitors, 25, Southernbay, Exeter. BIRKS (Maria), 86, Montpelier-rd, Peckham, Surrey, widow, Feb. 1; Francis Miller
and Steele, solicitors, St. Stephen's-chinbrs, Telegraph-st. BAILEY (Frederick), Roebuck hotel, Kidsgrove, Staffordshire, licensed victualler, or
bis widow, BAILEY (Sarah Jane). Feb. 6; E. Hollinsheal, solicitor, 2, Rathbone
8t, Tunstall. CARR (Rev. Edward), Clontuskert Rectory, Ballinaslom, Galway, Ireland, clerk in
holy orders. Feb. 8; Eardley, Holt, Hulbert, and Hubbard, solicitors, 28, Charles
st, St. James's-sq. CHALLEN (Allen), Old Red Lion inn, Underhill, Barnet, Herts, innkeeper. March 1 ;
W. O. Boyes, solicitor, Barnet, Herts. CALROW (James Richard). Kirkstall House, Hesketh Park, Southport, Lancashire.
gentleman, or his widow: CALRO (Marianne). arch 20: Broomhead, Wight
man, and Moore, solicitors, Bank-chmbrs, Georgo-st, Sheffield. CORDEROY (John), formerly of 13, Camden-sq, and 103, Cannon-st, chartered
accountant, late of Inyongombie, near Umtali, Rhodesia, South Africa, merchant.
Feb. 8; Leonard and Pilditch, solicitors, 57, New Broad-st. CRITCHLEY (Joseph), 50, Church-rd, Stanley, gentleman. Feb. 20; E. Hosking,
solicitor, 16, Fenwick-st, Liverpool. CRIPPS (Edward). Cirencaster, Gloucestershire, surgeon ; or his widow, CRIPPS
(Frances Augusta). Jan. 31 ; Haygarth and Lawrence, solicitors, Cirencester. DALE (Wellington), Penzance, Cornwall, solicitor. Feb. 18; Adam and Thring,
solicitors, 4, Qu'en-sq. Bath. DREWELL (Susannah Amelia), 3, Park-villas, East Finchley. Feb. 6; Lewis and Sons,
solicitors, 7, Wilmington-sq. DURLACHER (Alexander), 15, Old Burlington-st, gentleman. March 1; W. Beck,
solicitor, 2, East India-av, Leadenhall-st EVANS (Charles), 7, Lyon-pl, Glamis-st, Bognor, Sussex, gentleman. Feb. 18;
J. P. Garrett, solicitor, 38, Great James-st, Bedford-row, ELLIS (Charles), 38, Rugby-rd, Leamington, clerk of St. Mark's Church. Feb. 5 ;
Wright and Hassalls, solicitors, 11, Dormer-pl, Leamington. ENSLIE
(James Joseph), 9, Concession Kobe, Japan, Her Britannic Majesty's Consul
at Kobe. March 31; F, Tolley, solicitor, 2. Pancras-la, Queen-st, Cheapside. EMMERSON (Vary), 102, Cotewall-rd, Bradford, Yorkshire, widow. Jan. 18;
H. Farrar, solicitor, 5, Townhall-sq, Bradford. EMMETT (Anna Weymouth), Ipplepen, Devonshire, widow. Feb. 9; R. B. Woosnam,
solicitor, 29, Wolborough-si, Newton Abbot. FORSE (James Cox), Yeovil, Somersetshire, innkeeper. Feb. 1; H. S. and S. Watts,
solicitors, Yeovil, FRASER (Patrick). Stoke Lodge, Stoke d'Ahernon, Surrey, M.D. Feb. 3; N. Hanhart,
solicitor, 20, Southampton-st, High Holborn. FROST (Richard), sen., 22, Paradise-st, Jack-la, Hunslet, Leeds, Yorkshire. Feb. 1;
Carter, Ramsden, and Carter, solicitors, Carlton-chmbrs, 82, Albion-st, Leeds. GREEN (Julia), 8, Belgrare-rd. South Vorwood, Surrey, spinster. March 1; Wood and
Wootton, solicitors, 13, Fish-st-hill. GREEN (Anne), 43, Towngate-st, Poole, spinster. March 1; Wood and Wootton,
solicitors, 13, Fish-st-hill. GRANGER (Charles Dealtry), 16, Balaclava-st, Stockton-on-Tees, booking clerk.
Jan. 23; Langley and Elliot, solicitors, 22, High-st, Stockton-on-Tees. GEE (Magdalene Esther), 5, Abercromby-sq, Liverpool, Lancashire, widow. Feb. 13 ;
Payne and Frodsham, solicitors, 7, Harrington-st, Liverpool, GRUNDY (Herbert), Brentwood, Old Trafford, Stretford near Manchester, and carrying
on business at 54, John Dalton-st, Manchester, as an auctioneer and valuer under the style of William Grundy and Son. Feb. 1; W. F. Cooper, of the firm of
Cooper and Sons, solicitors, 942, King-st, Manchester. HARDWICK (George), Church-st, Mansfield, Nottingham, baker and confectioner.
Feb, 18; J. E. Alcock, solicitor, Mansfield. HOLMES (Michael), Lowertown Farm, Oxenhope, Yorkshire, farmer and carrier.
Feb. 10; Spencer and Clarkson, solicitors, North-st, Keighley. HEYWOOD (James), 77, Proughton-la, Manchester. Lancashire, building surveyor.
Feb. 1; L. R. and G. Entwistle, solicitors, 1, Police-st, Manchester. HEATI (Mary Ann), Zeaston, Ugborough, Devonshire, widow. Feb. 6; Windeatt
and Windeatt, solicitors, Church-la, Totnes, HODGSON (William), Rawcliffe, Yorkshire, gentleman. March 1; E. and T. Clark,
solicitors, Snaith, Yorkshire. HALDINSTEIN (Woolfe), 35, Hyde Park-gate, and a member of the firm of P. Haldin
stein and Sons, of Goswell-rd, London, Norwich, and Leicester. Feb. 20; A. H.
Bartlett, solicitor, 149, Cannon-st. Hickox (Walter). Gerrard's Cross, Buckinghamshire, gentleman. Feb. 1; Francis,
Miller, and Steele, solicitors, St. Stephen's-chmbrs, Telegraph-st. HARDWICK (Charles Richard), 41, York-st, Manchester, member of the firm of Sparrow,
Hardwick, and Co., and of Woodheyes Park, Ashton-on-Mersey, Cheshire.
Feb. 5; F. A. Janion, solicitor, 33, King-st, Manchester. HEDGES (Elizabeth), Eaton Bray, Bedfordshire, widow. Feb. 13; C. W. B. Calcott,
solicitor, Leighton Buzzard, Beds. IRVING (Francis), Tunbridge Wells, Kent, gentleman, formerly of Bournemouth,
Hants, 33, Oxford-ter, Hyde Park, and Folkestone, Kent. March 1; Colman and
Knight, solicitors, 4, Raymond-bldgs, Gray's-inn. JETONS (Thomas Henry), 19, Marmion-rd, Liverpool, Lancashire, iron merchant.
Feb. 13; W. A. Tetlow, solicitor, 8, Westminster-chmbrs, Crosshall-st, Liverpool. JOHNSON (Margaret), Westmoreland Villa, Prescot-rd, St. Helens, Lancasbire, widow.
Feb. 1; R. W. H. Thomas, solicitor, 16, Ormskirk-st, St. Helens.
APPOINTMENTS UNDER THE JOINT STOCK WINDING-UP ACTS. BRITISH INVESTORS' ASSOCIATION LIMITED.---Petition for winding-up to be heard
Jan, 25, before the Court sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand. Nicholson, Graham, and Graham, 24, Coleman-st, solicitors for the petitioner, Notices of intention to appear on the bearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm, or his or their solicitor (if any), and must reach the above
damed not later than six o'clock on Jan. 22. BRIGATON MUTUAL COAL SUPPLY ASSOCIATION LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by
Feb. 1, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. F. G. Clark, 56, Ship-st,
Brighton, Sussex, the liquidator of the company, BEESTON BREWERY COMPANY LIMITED. — Creditors to send in, by Feb. 12, their
names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. H. E. Hubbart, 10, South-parade, Nottingham, the liquidator of the company. Green and Williams, Eldon
cbmbro, Nottingham, solicitors to the liquidator. CASTLE BREWERY (BAMBURG ALTONA) GERMANY LIMITED. --Creditors to send in, by
Feb. 8, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. E. C. Powell, 18, St. Swithin's-la, the liquidator of the company. Robinson and Stannard, 19,
Eastcheap, solicitors for the liquidator. EILLE INDIA RUBBER COMPANY LIMITED:--Petition for winding-up to be heard Jan. 18,
before the Court sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand. Powell and Burt,
28 and 29, St. Swithin's-la, solicitors for the company. LAND MORTGAGE BANK OF INDIA (CREDIT FONCIER INDIEN) LIMITED.-Creditors to
send in, by Feb. 16, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims to Mr. J. R. Boyson, 4, East India-uy, Leadenhall-st, one of the liquidators of the
company. J. Lord, 5, Bank-bldgs, solicitor. LONDON AND GENERAL PERMANENT BUILDING SOCIETY, in voluntary dissolution under
an Instrument of Dissolution dated Feb. 15, 1893. ---Creditors to send in, by Jan. 30, their names and addresses and the full particulars of their claims to Mr. J. H. Cross, 337, Strand, one of the trustees in the dissolution of the society.
Robins, Hay, Waters, and Hay, 9, Lincoln's-inn-flds, solicitors for the trustees. MAWSON, PHILLIPS, AND CO. LIMITED (In voluntary liquidation).--Creditors to send
in, by Feb. 10, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. E. J. Wilkinson, at 59, John-it, Sunderland, one of the liquidators of the company. T. Thorburn
Nesbitt, 32, Fawcett-st, Sunderland, solicitor to the liquidators. SILVER KANDY (CEYLON) TEA COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Feb. 20,
their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mossrs. R. A. Gartside and F. Harrison,
67, Princess-st, Manchester, the liquidators of the company. SAIRE MOOR COAL COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Feb. 8, their names
and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses
JOHN (James), 51, Tymawr-st. St. Thomas, Swansea, Glamorganshire, foreman
smeltar. March 1; H. W. Paton, solicitor, Adelaide-chmbry, Swansea. JONES (Eliza), Frome, Somersetshire, widow. Feb. 10; J. A. March, solicitor,
Axbridge, Somerset. KELLY (Thomas), 32, Hanover-bldgs, Thomas-st, Oxford st, gentleman. Feb. 22 ;
Fooks, Chadwick, Arnold, and Chadwick, solicitors, 60, Carey-st, Lincoln's-inn. LIMERICK (Rt. Hon. William Hale John Charles Earl of), Tewin Water, Welwyn,
Hertfordshire. Feb. 20; Roopers and Whately, solicitors, 17, Lincoln's-inn-ilds. LARSEN (Neils Peter), 15, East Park-parade, Northampton, agent in the leather trade.
Feb. 13: Becke and Green, solicitors. 20. Market-sq, Northampton. MOFFETT (John), Thirston Shaw, near Felton, Northumberland, farmer and cattle
dealer; or his widow, MOFFETT (Frances Jane). March 7; W. Webb, solicitor,
23, Newgate-st, Morpeth, Northumberland. MACKAY (Christina), 0, Bradmore-chmbrs, Hammersmith, widow, Feb. 15; Murray,
Hutchins, Stirling, and Murray. solicitors. 11, Birchin-la. MALCOLM OF POLTALLOCH (Right Hon. Alice Frederica Baroness), 23. Great Cumber
land-pl, and of Poltalloch, Argyle, North Britain, wife of the Right Hon. John Wingfield, Baron Malcolm of Poltalloch. Feb. 9 : Robins, Hay, Waters, and Hay,
solicitors, 9, Lincoln's-inn-flde. MARGETTS (Thomas), Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire, labourer. Feb. 24 ; Wilkins and
Toy, solicitors, Chipping Norton. MEIN (George), Glendore Lodge, Clarendon-rd, Southsea, Hampshire, a major-general
in Her Majesty's army, retired. Feb. 10; F. G. Allen, solicitor, 66, Commercial-rd,
Portsmouth. MARDER (Nicholas), Burley, Lyme Regis. Dorset, master mariner. Feb. 6; Ford,
Harris, and Ford, solicitors. 25, Southernhay, Exeter. MARPLES (William), Liverpool, Lanes shire, and of Birkenhead, Cheshire, provision
broker. Feb. 20; Oliver. Jones, Billson, and Co., solicitors, 5, Cook-st, Liverpool. MOORE (Sarah Ann), Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, widow. Jan. 16; Burton and Son,
solicitors, 2, King-st, Great Yarmouth. NEWTON (Catherine), The Cottage, Bredwardine. Herefordshire, spinster, March 1;
Maples, Teesdale, and Co., solicitors, 6, Frederick's.pl, Old Jewry. OWEN (Eliza Ann), Norton Bromsgrove, Worcestershire, widow. Feb. 8; B. H.
· Sanders, solicitor, Bromsgrove PAYNE (Bem jamin), formerly of 44, Pimlico-rd, late of 27, Cicada-rd, Wandsworth
Common, Surrey, gentleman. Feb, 12; Kays and Jones, soliciiors, 2, New-inn,
Strand. POWELL (Susanna), Vernon House, 39, London-rd, North End, Portsea. Hampshire,
widow. Feb. 15: Pearce and Son, solicitors, 13, Union-st, Portsea, Hants. PULLEY (Henry), 12, Kimbolton-rd. Bedford, retired auctioneer. Feb. 9; Whyley and
Piper, solicitors, Dame Alice-st, Bedford. PURDY (Julia), 1, High-st, Warwick, widow. March 1; Sharman, Jackson, and
Archer, solicitors, Wellingborough. QUARTERMAN (Jesse), 22, Pugh-rd, Aston-juxta Birmingham, Warwickshire, retired
publican. Feb. 1: E. C. Newey, solicitor, 118, Colmore-row, Birmingham. QUESTED (Samuel). 12, Chaucer-rd, formerly known as 2, Cambridge-villas, Acton,
railway station master. Feb. 26; T. W. Mitchell, solicitor, 46, Bedford-row. RING (John), 12. Cambridge-grdns, Kilburn, doctor of medicine. Feb. 15; R.
A'Barrow, solicitor 9, Lincoln's-inn-Ads. RANDALL (Martha). Trowbridge, Wiltshire, widow. Feb. 1; Mann and Rodway,
solicitors, Trowbridge, Wilts, RODGERSON, otherwise KRAUS8 (Edward), 17, High-st, Blackpool, Lancaster,
plasterer's labourer. April 1; F. Whitaker, Duchy of Lancaster Office, Lan
caster-pl. REEVES (Rebecca), Loose, Kent, spinster Feb. 15; King and Hughes, solicitors,
6, Mill-st, Maidstone. SHAW (Henry), Deopham, Norfolk, farmer. Feb. 22 ; Garrod and Wilson, solicitors,
Diss, Norfolk SANDERS (Mary Anne), College-rd, Cheshunt, Hertfordshire, spinster. Feb. 28 ;
Merriman, Pike, and Merriman, solicitors, 25, Austin Friars. SLATER (Thomas), Granville Cottage, Lichfield-rd, Stone, Staffordshire, gentleman.
Feb. 13; C. R. A. Birch, solicitor, Stone, Staffordsbire. SMITH (Jasper), 315, Romford-rd, Forest Gate. Essex, March 1; J. Turner 'solicitor,
Dunedin House, Basinghall-av, Basinghall-st. SKINNER (John), formerly of 7, Palace Court-mansions, Bayswater, late of the hotel
Belvidere, San Remo, Italy gentleman, March 1; Sanderson, Holland, Adkin,
and Co, solicitors, 46, Queen Victoria-st. Shaw (William Turner), Vernon-st, and of the Strand, both in Derby, solicitor.
Feb. 8; W. H. Whiston, solicitor, 2.5, St. Mary's-gate, Derby. SWINSCOW (Edward), formerly of Quellemetterie, Montau Pretre, St. Hiliers, Jersey,
late of Laburnum Cottage, Ide, near Exeter, Deronshire, gentleman. Feb. 22;
Parson, Lee, and Co. solicitors. Abchurch House, Sherborne-la. TAYLOR (Hugh), 24, Frederick-rd, Edgbaston, Warwickshire, silversmith and electro
plater. Feb. 10; Sydney, Mitchell, and Willmot, solicitors, 112, Colmore-row,
Birmingham TURNER (Martha), 12, St. Luke's-grove, Southport, Lancashire, widow. Feb. 10;
Fletcher and Fletcher. solicitors, 33, London-st, Southport. THOMAS (Amelia), Tyllwyd Farm, Llanfabon, Glamorganshire, widow. Feb. 9 ; Leigh
and Horley, solicitors, Andrew's-bldgs. Queen's-st, Cardiff. TOES (George), 27, Bootbam, York, pensioner in Her Majesty's Sith Regiment of
Royal Irish Fusiliers. Feb. 23 ; W. Wilkinson, solicitor, St. Helen's-sq, York. THOMAS (Jane Elizabeth), Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, spinster, Jan. 16 ; Burton and
Son, solicitors, 2, King-st, Great Yarmouth. WILKINSON (Elizabeth), Bainbridge House, Easingwold, Yorkshire, widow. Feb. 23;
W. Wilkinson, solicitor, St. Helen's-sq, York. WILLIAMS (Morris), Brynmenrig, Llandegfan, Anglesey, gentleman. Feb. 7; W. T.
Jones, solicitor, 282, Bigh-st, Bangor. WHISTON (Rev. Robert), Old Palace, Rochester, Kent, J.P., formerly Fellow of Trinity
College, Cambridge, clerk in holy orders, a widower. March 1; Arnold, Baker,
and Day, solicitors, The Precincts, Rochester. WEST (George Henry), Craigallion. Private-rd, Denmark Hill, Feb. 10; A. Griffith
and F. A. Donald, 24, Connaught-rd, Stroud Green. Wilson (Thomas), Rosedale West Side, Lastingham. Yorkshire, yeoman.
Buchannan and Sons, solicitors, 23, Baxtergate, Whitby. WEBER (Eleanor). Highfeld, Sheffield, wile of John Jacob Weber. Feb. 9; Watson,
Esam, and Barber, solicitors, 29, Bank-st, Sheffield. WOODHAMS (Leonard), the elder, 123, London-rd, Southborough, Kent, cricket bat
and ball manufacturer Feb. 5; T. Buss, solicitor, Tunbridge Wells, Kent. WALLACE (Emily), 24, Norfolk-cres, Hyde Park, widow. Jan. 23 ; Budd, Johnsons,
and Jecks, solicitors, 24, Austin Friars.
Law Societies), Mr. R. Godlee (president of the Birmingham Law Society), Mr. T. R. Hughes (hon. secretary Shropshire Law Association), Mr. R. C. E. Plumptre, Capt. Burnett, Mr. J. F. Brewer (hon. treasurer of the society), Mr. G. M. Martin (hon. secretary), Mr. H. A. Wiggin (high sheriff of Staffordshire), Mr. T. M. Whitehouse, Mr. Horatio Brevitt (town clerk), Messrs. S. T. Mander, J.P., C. T. Mander, J.P., H. Vaughan, J.P., T. Beach, J.P., E. H. Thorne, T. Dallow, J. Taylor, S. W. Page, F. T. Langley, H. Staveley Hill, J. E. Underhill, C. B. Smith, E. B. Thorneycroft, W. C. Kettle, G. W. Walker, W. R. Lysaght, E. T. Cresswell, W. A. Foster, R. A. Willcock, T. F. Waterhouse, H. S. Pratt, H. B. Whitehouse, W. Gough Allen, C. N. Wright, S. Watkins, T. Hunt, A. C.. Skidmore, R. Tildesley, G. Vaughan, G. Baker, H. D. Stratton, S. R. Taylor, A. B. H. Sparrow, and others. Apologies for absence were announced from Mr. William Dent (the originator of the society), the Vice-president of the Incorporated Law Society, Mr. A. J. Beauchamp (president of the Worcestershire Law Society), Mr. W. B. Hulme (secretary of that society), Mr. E. C. Peele (president of the Shropshire Law Society), Mr. Pritchard (official receiver), Messrs. J. W. Stirk, J. Neve, T. G. Greensill, and other members of the society.
The dinner, prepared by Mr. Koontze, the new manager of the hotel, exhibited an exceptionally high standard of excellence, both in preparation and serving.
After the toast of “The Queen,"
The Recorder of Wolverhampton proposed “ The Houses of Parliament,” and said that that institution was known to lawyers-and most of those present were lawyers, or thought themselves such as the parent, regularly year after year, of a very goodly octavo volume of enactments on every possible subject, ranging from one Pole the other, and from the east to the west, and conceived in what was supposed to be the vulgar tongue, so happily framed, with such intricacy of expression, and such a marvellous arrangement of apparently contradictory details, that he humbly hoped that if the intelligence of the present mayor of Wolverhampton and that of their friend the deputy-mayor were devoted for long days and nights to the task of putting an intelligible construction upon those simple provisions, they would suffer no ill consequences. One of the two Houses of Parliament was chiefly responsible for the estimable enactments upon which they-or some of them-lived ; and, curiously enough, it was the other House which reserved to itself the privilege of putting the ultimate construction upon that which everbody else bad failed to understand. Though he did not wish to attribute to the members of that august assembly any higher intelligence or greater ability than he gave credit for to everyone of the lawyers he saw before him, he would say that there was no tribunal in the world where such an amount of capacity and such intellect was so patiently devoted to every matter which came before it. The toast of the Lower House was of special interest to them, because one of their local members was also a prominent member of the Wolverhampton Law Society. The lawyers of Wolverhampton had proved his faithfulness and ability. It would be unkindly, unnatural, and in Wolverhampton almost unfilial, to pass over the name of a still older friend, the father of the House of Commons, who, before the society was founded, was the representative of Wolverhampton in Parliament, and who, before most of them could remember, had attained a. brilliant position in that assembly. They hoped that their other mnmber, Sir Alfred Hickman, would rival the long life and the happy life of Mr. Villiers, and attain as great distinction as Sir Henry Fowler in the nation's service. To Mr. Staveley Hill he (the speaker) was indebted to an extent he would hardly care in public to express.
Sir Henry Fowler, in response, said that he was proud to be a member of the House of Commons, not only in his private capacity, but also as a member of the Legal Profession. There was a popular impression (but an entirely unfounded one), that the Legal Profession was over-repre. sented in the House of Commons. In certain returns it did appear that an enormous number of the members did belong to their profession, but many of these so belonged in only a nominal sense, and did not and never would belong to the Profession in a practical sense.
There were, moreover, fewer lawyers in the House of Commons and in the Government than in the legislative assemblies and governments of the United States, our colonies, and the principal constitutionally-governed countries of Europe. The legal element in the House of Commons was a most important element, and as was natural persons engaged in the administration of the law were most useful members of a body engaged in the enactment of law. He was glad to congratulate the society on the attainment of its jubilee; but he reminded them that though the society had been of great service, it had not been called upon to serve the Profession by raising its status, for its founders were men of the first rank in the Profession. He would say to the younger members present that they could not have for example a better type of the English soliciter than that represented by the founders of the society, and by those who had since carried it on. Sir Henry Fowler, in conclusion, referred to the desirability of modifying the distinction at present existing in England between the two branches of the Profession. There were yet some disabilities to be removed, some rights yet to be secured, and some honours yet to be shared by their branch of the Profession. Improvements had been made, and society, as a whole, entertained a higher opinion of the solicitor's profession in consequence of the high character of the gentlemen who were associated with it.
Mr. A. Staveley Hill also responded, and said that he had known Wolverhampton solicitors ever since the society had been founded. A more highly-minded set of men it had never been his privilege to associate with. He wished the society success in its future work.
Mr. R. C. E. Plumptre proposed “The Town and Trade of Wolverhampton," and said that there was an idea that lawyers battened upon the misfortunes of their fellow-citizens. This was untrue, for it was only
WOLVERHAMPTON LAW SOCIETY. A BANQUET in celebration of the jubilee of the Wolverhampton Law Society was held on the 8th inst, at the Star and Garter Hotel. The president of the society (Mr. C. Lemesle Adams) presided, and the attendance included Mr. A. M. Manby (vice-president), the Mayor of Wolverhampton (Councillor S. Craddock, J.P.), the Right Hon. Sir Henry H. Fowler, G.C.S.I., M.P., the Right Hon. A. Staveley Hill, Q.C., M.P., Sir Alfred Hickman, M.P., Mr. F. A. Bosanquet, Q.C. (recorder of Wolverhampton), Mr. N. C. A. Neville, J.P. (stipendiary magistrate), Mr. Joseph Addison (president of the Incorporated Law Society of the United Kingdom), Mr. Thomas Marshall (secretary of the Associated Provincial
in proportion as every section of the community was prosperous that the name of their good friend, Mr. C. J. Mander, Deputy and ex-Mayor of Legal Profession was prosperous too.
Wolverhampton. The Mayor, in response, spoke of the public and social improvements Mr. C. J. Mander responded in a happy and humorous manner. the town had experienced since the society was founded. It had been said
This terminated the proceedings. that the Legal Profession was over-represented in the local town council, but he knew of no gentlemen who applied themselves more assiduously to the work of the council than the legal members of the council. Mr. S. T. Mander also replied.
UNION SOCIETY OF LONDON. Mr. A. M. Manby proposed, “The Incorporated Law Society and The society met at the Inner Temple Lecture-hall on Wednesday evening, Provincial Law Societies.” He said that the Incorporated Law Society the 13th inst. ; Mr. J. Arthur Price, president, in the chair. After the provided for the education of law students, and exercised a wholesome reading of the minutes and the disposal of private business, Mr. A. C. supervision over the members of the Profession in practice. Mr. Augustine Arnold brought forward the motion of the agenda paper, viz. :
“ That in Birrell, Q.C., had declared that no lawyer took to the study of the law the opinion of this House, British Imperial Federation is not desirable.” from the love of it, or for the hope of glory; but he (Mr. Manby), as a
Speakers : for the motion, Messrs. Arnold, Withers, and R. Brown; humble member of the Profession, ventured to dissent from that state
against, Messrs. Price, Kinipple, Jacks, and Willson. The motion was ment. They were actuated by the love of man and by a desire to enhance lost. the general welfare. There were few laymen who wero not under great The society will meet at the Inner Temple Lecture-hall-3 (North) obligations to the men of law, and they could not discern any possibility
King's Bench Walk-on Wednesday evenings, the 20th and 27th inst., at that the Legal Profession would ever become useless. In fact, should the
8 o'clock. The subject for debate on the 20th Jan, will be,
“ That time ever come when the lion insisted upon lying down with the lamb, the vaccination should be made compulsory." Opener, Mr. W. R. Willson. latter animal would find himself in a very parlous case if he were unable On the 27th Jan. the subject for debate will be, “ That in the opinion of to institute an ex parte application for an injunction to restrain the lion this House, the British Government should entirely control the public from making a meal of him.
elementary schools now subsidised by it, and allow the children in such Mr. Joseph Addison, in response, spoke of the valuable aid which had schools to be instructed during school hours by representatives of their been rendered to the society by Sir Henry Fowler, who was one of their own denomination, in their own religion.” Opener, Mr. A. H. Withers.colleagues on the council of the society. He hoped that those services The following private business will be taken on the 20th Jan. : would be renewed year after year. Matters concerning the interests of Mr. Kinipple will move the following alterations in the rules, viz. : (a) To the Profession were coming under consideration, upon which he was sure strike out of Rule IV. the words “supported by at least seven members they would have the benefit of Sir Henry's counsel. The honour of their of the Committee,” and (b) To insert in Rule IX. the words “The ComProfession was dear to them all, and the organisation of the Profession in mittee shall meet at least once a month.” The Hon. Secretary will be the Law Society aud the provincial societies was essential to the obliged if members will enter subjects for debate in the book provided for conservation of their interests. To this end it was necessary that there
Members of the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, the should be intimate and amicable relations between the Incorporated Law Juridical Society of London, the Historical Society of Dublin, and the Society and the provincial societies. Without such organisation they Speculative Society of Edinburgh are elected without ballot. could not promote legislation for the improvement of the administration of the law, nor resist foolish legislation. If they did not protect their own interests, there was no one else to do it. He was sorry that there existed no association of the members of the Bar with which they could co-operate
UNITED LAW SOCIETY. for the general benefit of the Legal Profession. Much bad law had been
On Monday, the 11th inst., Mr. C. W. Williams in the chair, Mr. S. Saw, enacted, affecting, for instance, the law of property and bankruptcy, and
jun., opened a debate on the motion, " That Lord Rosebery was justified they were promised further legislation not only injurious to the Legal
in resigning the leadership of the Liberal party.” Mr. S. E. Hubbard Profession, but which, by reason of its socialistic character, throatened
opposed; and Messrs. A. H. Richardson, C. Kains-Jackson, G. H. Good. the commercial prosperity of the country, and the intelligence and
fellow, A. W. Marks, C. Herbert Smith, W. F. Symonds, and N. Tebbutt, efficiency of the people.
also addressed the House on the motion. Mr. Saw replied, and on a Mr. Marshall also responded.
division the motion was carried by a majority of three votes. Sir Alfred Hickman, M.P., proposed “The Wolverhampton Law Society,” and remarked that the members of the Legal Profession were among the best abused of any class of the community. One of the slanders he had heard applied to them was that a lawyer was like a
SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION. gentleman suffering from insomnia, because “ first he lies on one side, then he lies on the other, and when he is dead he lies still.” It was
The usual monthly meeting of the board of directors of this association somewhat remarkable that, notwithstanding this abuse, the family
was held at the Law Institution, Chancery-lane, London, on Wednesday, solicitor was the man to whom they all turned in any little difficulty, and
the 13th inst. ; Mr. Henry Morten Cotton in the chair, the other directors upon whose advice they absolutely relied. This inconsistency might be
present being Messrs. Grantham, R. Dodd, Wm. Geare, Henry Roscoe, accounted for by the fact that a wide contrast existed in popular estima
Sidney Smith, Richard W. Tweedie, F. T. Woolbert, and J. T. Scott tion between a good and a bad lawyer. A good lawyer had a high sense
(secretary). A sum of £335 was distributed in grants of relief, twentyof honour and duty, a nice conception of what was fitting in life, and an
five new members were admitted to the association, and other general
business was transacted. accurate notion of his obligations; but a pettifogging attorney was about the worst scoundrel they could meet with. In his speech the Recorder bad complained that Parliament turned out much legislation that nobody could understand. But surely the Legal Profession ought to be the last to complain, for if every enactment were fully understanded of PROMOTIONS AND APPOINTMENTS. the people, the lawyer's occupation, like Othello's, would be gone. It was
Information intended for publication under the above heading should reach us not later unnecessary to say anything to recommend the toast to them, for they
than Thursday morning in each week, as publication is otherwise delayed. were all aware of the utility of the Law Society. He thought that a law should be passed to enable lawyers to become county magistrates, for he could not understand why they were excluded. Mr. Addison had referred
Mr. HERBERT WELCH HALTON has been appointed a Judge of the in his speech to the Bill for the Registration of Titles. They were told
Court of Appeal in Egypt. Mr. Halton was called to the English Bar in that this was a most successful measure in some foreign countries and
1890, and is also a French avocat. in new countries, but for his own part he had come to the conclusion
Mr. FREDERICK STEVENS, prosecuting and assistant solicitor, Bradford, that the system was not very suitable to the complicated circumstances
has been appointed Deputy Town Clerk, Assistant Solicitor to the Cor. of property-ownership in this country. But he understood that the
poration, and Prosecuting Solicitor for the borough of Bradford, salary £600 per annum.
Mr. Stevens was admitted in 1886. reason why the Legal Profession objected to the Bill was that it would not lessen the expense of conveyancing, but would transfer the profits Mr. W. H. O. M. BRYANT, of the firm of Bryant and Reed, solicitors, from the Legal Profession to officials. As a layman, he would be strongly
Pembroke, has been appointed a Commissioner for Oaths. Mr. Bryant
was admitted in Dec. 1890. opposed to a scheme which would take from the Profession the best part of its business, deteriorate its character, and lower its status. He had
Mr. HENRY STANDRING, solicitor, of Rochdale, has been appointed a great pleasure in coupling with the toast the name of their president,
Perpetual Commissioner for taking the acknowledgments of deeds by Mr. Adams.
married women in and for the county of Lancaster. Mr. Standing was
admitted in Easter Term 1861. The President, in responding, referred to the traditions of the society,
Mr. LEWIS EMANUEL, of the firm of Emanuel and Simmonds, 36, whereby no speeches had hitherto been allowed at the annual dinners of
Finsbury-circus, has been appointed a Commissioner for Affidavits for the the society, and to the unobtrusive manner in which the society had
Province of British Columbia. Mr. Emanuel was sdmitted in 1873. carried on their work, but without vegetating, as he claimed that the society had done its share in the work of the last fifty years, and that he was glad to have Mr. Marsball's acknowledgment that this was so.
He further expressed his opinion that it was the improvement of the practice of the law, and not change in the law, that was needed, and that solicitors COMMERCIAL FAILURES AND Bills OF SALE.-According to Stubbs' were best able to help in bringing about such improvement. He desired Weekly Gazette, the number of failures in England and Wales gazetted to express to the honoured and distinguished guests that the society during the week ending the 9th Jan. was 117. The number in the desired to give them a most hearty and cordial welcome, and he hoped corresponding week of last year was 106, showing an increase of 11. The that the next, jubilee of the society might be celebrated with as pleasant number of bills of sale in England and Wales registered at the Queen's surroundings. He desired to avail bimself of the privileges of a chairman Bench for the week ending the 9th Jan, was 118. The number in the by adding to the toast list the toast of “Our Guests,” coupled with the corresponding week of last year was 151.