E E 27 the old proviso for redemption is released, and a new proviso for redemption upon payment of the amount of the then outstanding balance of debt is substituted, the deed of transfer should be stamped as follows:(1) With the ad valorem duty of 6d. per cent. on the amount transferred; (2) with the fixed duty of 10s. in respect of the release of portion of the debt, unless, indeed, the total sum at any time secured was less than £2000, in which case the ad valorem re-conveyance duty of 6d. per cent. on that total sum will be sufficient. The reason why the duty secondly specified is chargeable is that, as the deed wipes out portion of the original debt, it will follow that, when the balance is paid off, the only duty chargeable will be ad valorem duty of 6d. upon that balance, no duty being then chargeable on the portion of the original debt wiped out." FIRTH COLLEGE.-The committee have accepted, on behalf of the society, an offer that they should have a right to nominate one ex-officio member to serve on the governing body of the University College (at present Firth College) of Sheffield. INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY OF THE UNITED KINGDOM.-The annual provincial meeting of the above society was held at Birmingham, on the 13th and 14th Oct. last. There was an extremely large attendance, and the number of papers read was limited, so as to give proper time for their consideration and discussion. The hon. sec. attended as a deputation from the committee, and at the request of the committee gave an invitation to the society to hold its autumnal meeting in 1897 in Sheffield, which was subsequently accepted. The meeting in Sheffield will commence on Tuesday evening, the 5th Oct. Wednesday and Thursday will be devoted to business, consisting of the presidential address, reading of papers, and other matters; the Solicitors' Beuevolent Association meeting being held on the Thursday, and, on the Friday, excursions will be arranged for. An entertainment committee has been elected, consisting, at present, of Messrs. W. E. Clegg, Esam, T. W. Hall, Howe, Hughes, A. E. Maxfield, Parker, C. M. Smith, Webster, and A. M. Wilson, with Mr. H. and Mr. E. Bramley, and it may be supplemented by additional names. The preparations for this meeting will occupy much of the time of the entertainment committee. It is hoped all our members will do their best to make the meeting thoroughly interesting, successful, and enjoyable. Reference will be made to the approaching visit of the Incorporated Law Society at the a inual meeting of your society, and a circular will shortly be issued to members on the subject. The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir M. Hicks Beɛ c) approved of the Incorporated Law Society receiving a portion (7s. 6d. in respect of London solicitors, and 5s. for country ones) of the annual solicitors' certificate duty, and, in committee on the Finance Bill of 1896, moved the insertion of a clause to give effect to this. Sir Wm. Vernon Harcourt, however, suggested that sufficient time had not been allowed for its consideration, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer therefore withdrew the clause, promising it should be reconsidered in 1897. The Incorporated Law Society think it is desirable that the position of affairs should be brought to the notice of all members of Parliament. It may not be generally known that the annual certificate duty was first imposed in 1785, to make up an unexpected deficiency in the shop tax. The latter impost has been long since repealed, but the tax in aid of it still continues. Mr. W. B. Esam, your now retiring president, has been as such elected an extraordinary member of the council for the year. SECRETARYSHIP.-Those members of the society who have served on the committee will share with the present members of it the feeling that the measure of success which the society has attained is largely due to the devotion, ability, and zeal of Mr. Herbert Bramley, who has throughout its existence been the honorary secretary, and indefatigable in his exertions to promote and extend its influence and usefulness. The committee feel that the time will be opportune for recognising his valuable services in asking him to hold the office of president during the forthcoming year of the visit of the parent Society to Sheffield, and a proposal to this effect will be submitted to the meeting, as will, also, one to pay him the compliment of appointing him a life member of the society. A temporary arrangement might, under other circumstances, have probably been made as regards the secretaryship during his year of office as president; but Mr. Bramley has found his duties as town clerk so exacting that he has expressed to the committee his desire to retire permanently from the secretaryship, the duties of which the committee feel can never be more efficiently performed than has been the case in the past. He has the assurance of the committee, and will undoubtedly have that of the general body of the members, that his valuable services have been recognised and appreciated, and that the hope on their part is entertained, that in other positions he may long be able to render good service to the society, with which he has been so closely connected, and whose interests he has had much at heart. The question of a successor has received the careful consideration of the committee, who will recommend the appointment of Mr. Edward Bramley, who has already acquired considerable experience of the duties of the office, and who, it has been ascertained, will be willing to accept the office, if appointed to it at the annual meeting. MISCELLANEOUS.-The rooms have been let twenty-eight times during the year. 1437 twopenny and 971 sixpenny conditions of sale of the society have been sold during the year. 661 actions were commenced in the Sheffield District Registry during the year 1896, or 84 less than during the previous year. In the Bankruptcy Court, 51 bankruptcy petitions (a decrease of 14 on the preceding year) were presented, including 11 by creditors, and 12 bankruptcy notices issued. In the 661 actions, there were 187 judgments in default of appearance, 6 judgments on order for substituted service, 7 judgments in default of pleading, 21 judgments under Order XIV., 1 on orders of reference, 3 on verdict or writ of inquiry, 2 of which were for the plaintiff, and 1 for the defendant. 49 deeds of arrangement were registered under the Act of 1887, a decrease of 8 on the preceding year. HARDWICKE SOCIETY. THE weekly meeting was held in the Inner Temple Lecture-hall, King's Bench-walk, on Friday, the 19th inst. Mr. D. F. Hogg moved, and Mr. Cecil Walsh opposed, the following resolution, which was carried: "That this House disapproves of the Women's Suffrage Bill at present before the House of Commons." UNION SOCIETY OF LONDON. THE Society met at the Inner Temple Lecture-hall on Wednesday evening, the 24th inst.; Mr. Stanley Latham, vice-president, in the chair. After the reading of the minutes and the disposal of private business, Mr. Haythorne Reed brought forward the motion on the agenda paper, viz., "That serious alterations are required in the laws regulating divorce in this country." Speakers for the motion, Messrs. Haythorne Reed, Willson, Kinipple, and Lyons; against, Messrs. Ball, Withers, Brown, and Sherwood. The motion was carried. SWANSEA INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY. THE annual meeting of this society was held on Friday, the 19th inst.; Mr. W. Collins presiding. Mr. J. C. Woods was elected president; Mr. J. Moy Evans, vice-president; Mr. D. Seline, hon. sec. and treasurer; and the following were appointed on the committee: Messrs. S. Owen, A. E. Dunn, L. L. Vanderpump, F. B. Wood, J. V. Leeder, C. J. Jenkins, J. P. Jones-Powell, W. E. Harris, G. Taylor, W. P. Smith, and C. Slater. PROMOTIONS AND APPOINTMENTS. Information intended for publication under the above heading should reach us not later than Thursday morning in each week, as publication is otherwise delayed. Mr. M. R. KNOWLES, solicitor, Skipton, has been appointed Clerk to the Board of Guardians and Rural District Council of the Skipton Union, in suceession to Mr. Thos. P. Brown, who has retired. Mr. Knowles was admitted in 1889. Mr. PERCY SPENCER, of Whitchurch, Salop, has been appointed a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the acknowledgments of Deeds by Married Women for the County of Salop. Mr. Spencer was admitted in January 1874. CORRESPONDENCE. This department being open to free discussion on all Professional topics, the Editor does not hold himself responsible for any opinions or statements contained in it. NEW COUNTY COURT RULES. From the rules as published in your last issue, it appears that, where a creditor desires to sue a person residing more than twenty miles from the creditor's court, the creditor, before he can issue summons, must deposit in court a sum as security for defendant's costs. The registrar also is directed, in deciding whether to grant leave to sue in the creditor's court, to consider "the balance of convenience," that is, whether it will be more convenient to try in the creditor's or in the debtor's court. In large commercial centres the new rules may have a disastrous effect as far as creditors are concerned, and, seeing that in the High Court in only a comparatively small number of cases can security for costs be obtained, it seems extraordinary that such security should be required in the County Courts. With regard to the "balance of convenience," the tendency of recent decisions has been to give the creditor the right to sue in his own court if only a very small part of the cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of that court, yet the Rule Committee seem to wish to override these decisions as far as they can. The president of the Incorporated Law Society has signified his approval of these rules. Have the Law Society taken any steps to ascertain the feeling in the country upon this subject? Unfortunately, no notice of the intention to make rules for County Courts is required, so that even the Legal Profession, as a body, know nothing of them until the rules are made. County Courts, we believe, were established for the more speedy recovery of small debts. These harassing restrictions, coupled with the already too heavy fees, will surely tend to drive the work from the courts altogether. Why is it that, with some persons placed in high positions, the creditor should be treated as more dishonourable than his debtor? If the object of the new rules be to strike at the system of giving credit, would it not be more straightforward and satisfactory to promote a Bill for reducing the period of limitation, than, by new rules, to put vexatious obstacles in the way of a creditor legally obtaining his just due ? SOLICITOR. DEBT COLLECTORS IN COUNTY COURTS.-It has been the practice for several years past for debt collectors to sign instructions for and issue summonses in certain County Courts in the Midlands; one collector informed me he issued about 200 last month. The modus operandi is for the collector or his clerk to go into the box and be sworn; he is then asked by the registrar how much the several debtors owe, and by what instalments he is willing to accept payment of the debts; he is never asked how he knows the money is owing, and, consequently, never proves the cases; in fact, I have known one collector take another collector's cases for him. Creditors prefer employing a debt collector to a solicitor, because there is no occasion for them to attend the court; whereas, if they instruct a solicitor, they have to attend and prove the debt, the registrar insisting on a solicitor strictly proving his cases, and will not even take a letter promising payment as proof, unless he can prove the handwriting. Now it is very hard on solicitors, who have paid heavy fees besides the annual certificate duty, that they should be deprived of County Court work in this way, and I do think that the Government, receiving the income they do from solicitors' certificate duty, ought to protect us from encroachments of this kind. I should be glad to know whether there have been any cases decided against collectors under 54 & 55 Vict. c. 39, sects. 43 and 44, as on page 521 of the "Solicitors' Diary 1897" there is a note to the effect that, if any person, not a certificated solicitor, issues a plaint in a County Court, he is liable to the penalty (plaintiffs excepted) ? ADVOCATE. FINANCE ACT 1894, SECT. 6 (2)-PROOF OF PAYMENT OF ESTATE DUTY ON REAL ESTATE.-I append a copy of a letter recently addressed by me to the Board of Inland Revenue and of their reply. Referring to the last paragraph of that reply, the expense of a duplicate (unsworn) copy would be trifling, whereas the procedure under sect. 11 (1) involves both trouble and delay. In view of the board's attitude, the advantage of postponing payment until after the delivery of the Inland Revenue affidavit is obvious; the form C-1, would then have to be delivered in duplicate, and one copy returned with a stamped receipt for the duty indorsed. It is, however, often convenient (especially in small estates) to pay on delivery of the Inland Revenue affidavit, and it is to be regretted that the officials cannot see their way to follow the practice adopted by them in other cases where duty is payable. W. HENNELS. Copy letter to the secretary of the board dated the 12th Jan. :- [Same heading as above].-Where an executor pays estate duty in respect of real property devised to him upon trust on delivery of the Inland Revenue affidavit, some difficulty and inconvenience arise in practice, when the property is dealt with, in proving that the duty has been paid. I would point out that, where the executor pays duty in respect of property not under his control on delivery of the Inland Revenue affidavit, an account thereof has to be delivered in duplicate, and one copy, with a stamped receipt for the duty, is returned. It would be a great convenience to persons dealing with trust estates if a similar procedure (i.e., delivering the Inland Revenue affidavit in duplicate) were adopted in the case first above mentioned, and I hope the Board of Inland Revenue will consider this suggestion and see their way to adopt it. Copy of the secretary's reply dated the 15th Feb.:-[Same heading as above]. The Board of Inland Revenue have had under consideration your letter of the 12th ult., and, in reply, I am directed to acquaint you that they do not see their way to adopt your suggestion. In the case which you suppose the executor, being also trustee of real estate, will naturally include the real estate in account No. 5 of the affidavit, and, if he wishes to pay the duty in one sum, he can do so, and then apply under sect. 11 (1) for a certificate that the estate duty on that real estate has been fully paid. The board are of the opinion that the delivery in duplicate of original affidavits, which include real estate, would seriously add to the expenses incurred by the public. CERTIFICATE DUTY.-I do not at all object to this duty, for it tends to keep the Profession from being unduly crowded. Were it not for this annual expense, many a tradesman would make his son a solicitor and keep him in the shop to attend to customers and issue writs, &c., whenever required. The duty has also the effect of driving out of the Profession many solicitors whose practice has dwindled away to nothing from one cause or another, to the benefit of those who continue to carry on their business on better principles. If more solicitors are admitted on the roll, competition will be keener, and the loss of one client will be a great misfortune in comparison to the small advantage gained by the repeal of the duty. A SOLICITOR. THE FINAL PASS EXAMINATION. I have read with amazement the proposal of your correspondent an Articled Clerk," who should know that the Law Society have no power to dispense with the examination, even if they desired to adopt his suggestion. Like him I was a managing clerk, and during my articles was engaged upon arduous duty from 9 a.m. to 8.30 p.m., with scarcely a holiday during the whole period. Yet six months hard work from 9 p.m. to 1 a.m. got one though. I commend this plan to your correspondent. J. ADMINISTERING THE OATH.-My attention has just been directed to the letter of Mr. J. Webster Brown in your issue of the 23rd Jan. last. The reproof contained therein was so sweeping that I turned back to the letter of "A Justices' Clerk" to see what he had said to merit such severe treatment; and I looked up the Law List to ascertain Mr. Brown's standing and possibility of experience. As to the latter I am sorry to say his name appears neither amongst Counsel nor Solicitors, so that one test of the merit of his statements is wanting. As to the letter of "A Justices' Clerk," I am bound to say that the reference therein to "the Scotch Oath," which may be said to be a clumsy method and unsuited to an English police-court," seemed to me to betray a want of knowledge on the part of the writer of the Oaths Act 1888; a failing in that universal ignorance which apparently characterises justices' clerks, at which I am the less surprised in that the Home Office issued circulars to all justices' clerks with reference to the Act. I am unable to entirely concur in the statement that sect. 5 applies quite regardless of religious belief," for the Scotch oath (see Chitty Stats., " Oath," p. 17) contains the words, "I swear by Almighty God, as I shall answer to God at the great day of judgment," which to my mind necessitates a belief (a) in the existence of God, and (b) in the advent at a future date of a day of judgment, and, therefore, require a religious belief of a more or less defined character. I may be allowed to point out that the initiative must come from the person desiring to take advantage of sect. 5 of the Oaths Act, and although, no doubt, the justices' clerk might draw the witness's attention to the fact that he need not kiss a Testament, but may take the oath in the Scotch form, it is obvious that to do this will use up time, which in busy courts is of some value. And further the clerk might as well be expected to ask the witness whether he has any religious belief, or is a Jew, or prefers to affirm, in all of which cases the Legislature has left the initiative with the witness. As to the form of the Scotch oath I quite agree that it is clumsy and unsuited to the genius of an English policecourt. The manner of its administration is for the clerk to stand up and to utter the first sentence which is repeated by the witness; the clerk then continues with the next sentence, the witness repeating this; and so Such a course of proceeding is calculated to flurry the witness, and to waste time; and though the form of oath is solemn, is is calculated as much as he present oath to lose its solemnity by constant repetition. The query of "A Justices' Clerk," I conceive, was, whether, having regard to the terms of the Oaths Act 1888, he would be justified in swearing a witness who repeats the ordinary form of oath administered with uplifted hand, and without kissing the Testament. I apprehend such a method is not authorised by the Act, and if it stood alone would not be a proper administration of the oath. If, however, the witness declares that such form of administration will be binding on his conscience, I submit that then the oath will have been validly administered: (see Taylor on Evidence, par. 1388). G. L. HASLEHURST. on. THE POSITION OF ANGLO-FRENCH COMPANIES.-I have read with interest the article on Anglo-French Companies which appeared in the LAW TIMES of the 13th inst., and possibly, as the subject is one of importance, I may be permitted to submit the reasons which I think may fairly be urged in support of the decision of the Court at Aix. The case turned upon the question (1) of domicile, (2) an attempted or alleged evasion by French subjects of the laws of France. As to the domicile of the company, this is always a question of fact; sometimes there are circumstances which raise the question whether the domicile of origin or the foreign domicile should prevail, but there were no such circumstances in this case; the questions then to be decided was whether the actual and true domicile was in France or England. The evidence that the domicile of "La Construction Limited" was in France seems to have been overwhelming. This alone would have been sufficient without the remainder of the case to have justified the French court in doing what it did, taking a peep behind the scenes; in other words, going behind the English registration and looking not at the facts as the promoters and French directors wished them to be looked at, but as French creditors wished them to be viewed. The second point was the alleged attempt to evade the law of France. Now, if there is one principle of what I may call the common law of the civilised nations of the world, more firmly established than another, it is this, that no member of the family of nations will permit its subjects to take advantage of any law or formality of a foreign state in order to successfully evade a law prescribed by the legislature of the state to which they are by birth or naturalisation subject. The only exceptions to this rule are exceptions based upon reasons connected with religion and morality, and these exceptions do not hold good in France so far as French subjects are concerned. Now, so far as the question of fact is concerned, whether there really was a design to evade the law of France in this case, I am not competent to judge because I have not the evidence before me ; but there is the fact, that the French court was satisfied of this, and this being so, the case would seem to be complete, and no one, as far as I can see, has any just cause of complaint. As to the Convention of April 1862, all that it does is this, to secure to companies (within the scope of the convention) the power of exercising all their rights and of appearing before the tribunals, either to bring or defend an action in the dominions and possessions of the foreign powers, "subject to the sole condition of conforming to the laws of such dominions and possessions." The words I have underlined govern the interpretation of the whole convention, which merely gives to foreign companies the rights and privileges (named in the convention) and places them so far on the same footing as home companies, and of course, so far, and further according to acts or conduct, as in the case of "La Construction Limited," even to a greater extent, companies become subject to the operation of the laws of the country where they carry on their business. The decision does not, I think, necessarily turn upon the question of fraud or no fraud; for even if with no fraudulent purposeand indeed so far as evidence is concerned I know not and do not suggest the existence of fraud in the case of " La Construction Limited"-yet the intention of French citizens, however innocent of dishonesty, to evade their country's laws would be quite sufficient. I venture, in conclusion, to submit that no alteration of the convention which any responsible and well-advised government would accept could possibly affect such a decision as has been I think very properly given in this case, by the court at Aix. Conventions and treaties are after all governed and construed by rules taken from that common law which we in common with the civilised nations of the world inherit and cherish, and its principle, differing in this respect from our unfortunate statute law, do not show much favour to the promoter of the period. SHACKELTON HALLETT. QUEEN'S DIAMOND JUBILEE.-Kindly allow me to throw out a hint to the Council of the Incorporated Law Society, whether the Queen's Diamond Jubilee year might not be commemorated in a similar manner to the Jubilee year 1887, by the London solicitors entertaining their provincial brethren and holding the annual meeting in London? A PROVINCIAL. WILLS. In the LAW TIMES of the 10th Dec. 1887 the following poetical will of John Davidson, of Glenview Hotel, Coonoor, India, is stated to have been proved in the High Court before Mr. Justice Kernan, 1887, viz. : As to all my worldly goods I have in store, I leave to my dear wife for evermore. I freely give, I will no limit fix: In an article entitled "Whimsical Will Making," in the Temple Bar Magazine for Jan. 1897. the same will, in the following slightly different phraseology, is stated to have been that of a Mr. Wheatstone, a Chancerylane solicitor, viz. : As to my worldly goods now or to be in store, I give to my beloved wife and hers for evermore. I give all freely-1 no limit fix: This is my will, and she's executrix. It would be interesting to know if Mr. Wheatstone took his precedent from the LAW TIMES, or whether the two wills are a coincident. Possibly some of your readers may be able to throw light on the matter. NEWTON WADE. THE FINAL PASS EXAMINATION.-The suggestions of your correspondent who signs himself "An Articled Clerk," which appear in your issue of the 13th inst., are far too good a joke for so serious a journal as the LAW TIMES. Because, after twenty years' experience (please spell experience with a capital E.), since he passed his Intermediate, he still cannot do the same at his Final, he thinks that the Law Society shonld honour Her Majesty's Diamond Jubilee by admitting every daft loon who, having passed his Intermediate, cannot get his name in the list of successful candidates for the Final. Why not dispense with the Preliminary, Intermediate, and Final altogether, and put the name of every lunatic pauper who can beg, borrow, or steal the necessary fees, on the roll of solicitors? I venture to think that this suggestion is about as practical as those of your correspondent" Articled Clerk." A SOLICITOR. THE PROPOSED BILLS OF SALE AMENDMENT ACT. May I be allowed humbly to protest against the proposed introduction by the Government of a Bill of Sales Amendment Bill? The passing of the Bills of Sale Acts 1878 and 1882 (notably the latter) was followed by an enormous crop of litigation, which has only within this last year or two shown a tendency to decrease. Comparative peace, however, now reigns, and we are beginning to know pretty well where we stand with regard to the construction of these two difficult Acts. It is now proposed apparently to turn on a fresh tap of litigation; for the public may rest assured that, however carefully drawn the proposed new Act may be, every clause will be contested in the courts with dogged persistency. Judicial astonishment has been sometimes expressed that bankruptcy and bills of sale cases are fought with such tenacity, but the reason is surely plain enough. People, as a rule, do not give bills of sale until in financial extremities, and the resulting litigation simply shows a very natural desire on the part of the creditors to get hold of the last shred of assets. NOTES AND QUERIES. E. T. B. None are inserted unless the name and address of the writer are sent, not necessarily for publication, but as a guarantee of bona fides. Queries. 26. TITLE DEEDS RIGHT TO CUSTODY OF.-A. dies, having by will devised his real property, consisting of several houses, to X. and Z. X. is the executor of the will, and takes over the testator's deeds which relate to all his property. Z. is the largest owner in point of value of property passing under the will. Has he a right to custody of the deeds, and, if so, how can he enforce such right against X. if he refuses to hand them over? Authorities will oblige. LEX. Answers. (Q. 25.) STAMP.-A deed of discharge of a trustee under sect. 11 (1) of the Trustee Act 1893 is considered liable to only one stamp of 10s. if it merely contains the consent to the vesting of the trust property in the remaining trustees, but if it operates to vest the property in the continuing trustees, on the authority of Hadgett v. The Commissioners, it is liable to two stamps. W. DE B. H. LEGAL OBITUARY. Mr. EDWARD CASEY, solicitor, of Hitchin, Herts, died on the 4th inst. Deceased was clerk to the Hitchin magistrates, and was a nephew of Sir Henry Hawkins. He was admitted in Trinity Term 1867. HALLILAY'S CONVEYANCING.-A Concise Treatise on the Law and Practice of Conveyancing; together with the Solicitors' Remuneration Act 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 44), and the Orders on Conveyancing Fees and Charges. Price 8s.-HORACE Cox, "Law Times" Office, Windsor House, Bream's-buildings, E.C.—[ADVT.] LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY.-The usual weekly meeting of the above society was held at the Law Institution, Chancery-lane, on Tuesday, the 23rd inst.; chairman, Mr. Arthur E. Clarke. The subject for debute was: DXXXI." That the case of Cocks v. Chapman (75 L. T. Rep. 196; (1896) 2 Ch. 763) was wrongly decided." Mr. Neville Tebbutt opened in the affirmative. and Mr. H. L. Addison seconded in the affirmative; Mr. Staplee Firth opened in the negative, and Mr. J. B. Eastley seconded in the negative. The following members also spoke : Messrs. McCurdy, Morton, Baker, Dickson, F. Arnold, B. C. Mitter, Horace Miller. The motion was lost by five votes.-The subject for debate at the next meeting of the society on Tuesday, the 2nd March is "That in view of recent events it is desirable that this country should take the first suitable opportunity of withdrawing form the concert of Europe." BIRMINGHAM.-A meeting of this society was held on the 15th inst. in the Law Library, Bennett's-hill, Mr. B. G. Grimley presiding. A debate was held on moot point No. 858: "Several of the leading tradesmen in a country town form an association for the protection of their common interests. It is agreed, among other things, that any member may be excluded by a majority of the members. It is understood, but not formally agreed, that no member will employ a clerk or shopman who has been discharged by another member within a year. A., a member of the association, discharges one of his clerks, Z. Shortly afterwards Z. applies to P., another member, who takes him into his employment. A., after consulting the other members, and with their consent, informs P. that if he does not forthwith discharge Z. the association will exclude P. from membership. P. protests, being of opinion that A.'s reasons for discharging Z. were not well founded, but, finding that the other members persist in their intention, discharges Z. with due notice. Has Z. any right of action against A. and the members of the association other than P.? The speakers were: For the affirmative, Messrs. H. H. d'Egville, P. T. Talbot, A. F. Lovatt, J. A. Lacy, and F. O. Hobson; for the negative, Messrs. F. W. Green, H. Eaden, G. E. T. Edalji, and T. P. Orwin. The Chairman having summed up, the question was decided in the affirmative by a majority of five votes. BOURNEMOUTH AND DISTRICT.-At an ordinary meeting, held on the 16th Feb., a debate took place upon the following subject: "That the case of Sarson v. Roberts (73 L. T. Rep. 174; (1895) 2 Q. B. 395) was wrongly decided." The debate was opened by Mr. E. E. Dawson, and opposed by Mr. L. E. Rumsey. After a long and interesting discussion, the Chairman summed up, and the decision of the Court of Appeal was confirmed by a majority of three votes. A letter was read from Mr. G. E. Haines resigning the honorary secretaryship of the society owing to illhealth, and Mr. W. R. Fisher was elected to fill the vacancy. BURNLEY AND DISTRICT.-The members of this society held their ninth ordinary meeting on Thursday evening, the 18th inst., in Cronkshaw's hotel. Amongst those present were Messrs. E. F. P. Emmett (who presided), R. Baldwin, A. B. Clarke, A. L. Garnett, S. Lawson, T. B. Nowell, J. C. Pollard, Richard Procter, T. E. Rodgers, LL.B., V. H. Woodhouse (solicitors), H. Ogden, J. K. Pickup (secretary), R. M. Prescott (town clerk, Nelson), F. Roberts, A. Shaw, T. Snowden, and Lawson Tayler (articled clerks). The subject for discussion was Law Notes " Moot No. 5, "Does the perpetuity rule apply to limitations by way of legal contingent remainder in landed property ?" Mr. T. B. Nowell, solicitor, argued for the affirmative; Messrs. Baldwin, Clarke, Garnett, Prescott, Procter, Ogden, Shaw, and Taylor supported Mr. Nowell. Mr. T. Edgar Rodgers, solicitor, argued for the negative; Messrs. Lawson, Pollard, Woodhouse, Pickup, and Roberts supported Mr. Rodgers. Mr. Emmett delivered a learned summing up, after which he put the question to the meeting, which was decided in the affirmative by a majority of three. NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE.-The fourteenth general meeting of the above society was held on Wednesday, the 24th inst., in the Law Library; Mr. J. Gibson Youll, clerk of peace, in the chair. The subject for debate was as follows: "A. finds a £5 bank note, and takes it into his possession without knowing who the owner is. Before he finds out who the owner is he loses the note. or suffers it to be destroyed through his negligence. Can the owner claim compensation from A. ?" Messrs. W. J. Elsdon and E. C. Sanders took the affirmative, and Messrs S. D. Cole and W. J. Brandling the negative side of the question. On the debate being thrown open Messrs. Lisle, Ord, Brown, and Lemon also spoke, and Mr. Elsdon replied. The Chairman summed up the debute and put several very instructive hypothetical cases explaining how the principle might be made to apply in either case, and on a division there was a majority of one vote in favour of the affirmative.-At the next meeting of the society on the 3rd March, Mr. J. Grant Gibson the Official Receiver, will lecture on Some anomalies in the present law of bankruptcy." 66 NOTTINGHAM.-The most successful annual dinner ever held in connection with the Nottingham Law Students' Society took place at the George hotel on the 16th inst. His Honour Judge Masterman (hon. president of the society) presided over a gathering which constituted a record in the history of the society, and amongst the guests were the mayor (Ald. E. H. Fraser), the sheriff (Mr. F. R. Radford, J.P.), Mr. Jesse Hind, J.P. (clerk to the county council), Mr. H. Y. Stanger, Q.C., Mr. Henry Wing, J.P., Mr. T. A. Hill, Col. J. Wright, and Mr. Tinsley Lindley. The vice-chairman was Mr. J. T. Perry (ex-president), and amongst those present were Messrs. Edgelow, B. S. Wright (hon. secretary), O. W. Hind, J. W. Hind, Field, H. A. Dowson, W. Wing, Place, W. E. Morris, A. F. Eaton, A. Barlow, J. Johnstone, H. P. Day, E. Williams, P. G. Burton, J. A. Simpson, J. W. B. Allen, J. W. Briggs, H. Wyles, F. E. Burton, H. B. Littlewood, C. B. Wilkinson, G. Barrows, W. Moss, G. W. Turpin, P. Wood, J. J. Robinson, F. Jackson, C. W. Whitgreave, J. B. Sharp, G. P. Hazzledine, G. H. Thorne, F. Berrymon, A. Wilson, C. des Forges, H. W. Munk, and F. Allcock. To surrender at the High Court of Justice in Bankruptcy. ALEXANDER SARA (trading as Madame S. Turn), Upper-st, Islington, ladies' outfitter. Pet. Jan. 22. Order, Feb. 16. BATEMAN, ROWLAND, Harrington-mansions, Shaftesbury-av, gentleman. Pet. Jan. 19. Order, Feb. 16. DALLIMORE, WILLIAM HORATIO, Castle st, Long-acre, builder. Pet. Jan. 16. Order, Feb. 16. DAVIS, DAVID, Old Ford-pl, Bow, saddler. Pet. Jan. 28. Order, Feb. 16. GOODMAN, WILLIAM LAW, Holborn Bars, insurance agent. Pet. Feb. 16. Order, Feb. 16. HART, FRANCIS J. ERNEST, Strand, promoter of public companies. Pet. Jan. 16. LACEY, HENRY, North End-rd, Walham Green, coal dealer. Pet. Feb. 1. Order, To surrender at their respective District Courts BISHOP, FREDERICK (trading as I. Fishop and Co.), Totterdown, coal merchant. Feb. 16. Cox, FRANK, Devonshire. baker. Ct. Fxeter. Pet. Feb. 15. Order, Feb. 15. EVANS, NATHANIEL, Llanelly, grocer. Ct. Carmarthen Pet. Feb. 16. Order, Feb. 16. FENTON, FREDERICK, and SUNDERLAND, WILLIAM, Carlisle, printers. Ct. Carlisle. FAIRBAIRN, ALFRED, Snaith, builder. Ct. Wakefield. Pet. Feb. 16. Order. Feb. 16. Order, Feb. 15. Order, Feb 17. HARDING, JOHN, Bristol, corn merchant. Ct. Bristol. Pet. Feb. 17. HANKS, FRANK, Cheltenhem, late livery-stable keeper. Ct. Cheltenham. HILL. SARAH ANN (trading as S Hill), Leicester, boot dealer. Ct. Leicester. Pet. HEBDEN, WILLIAM, late Brighton, late music-hall proprietor. Ct. Wakefield. JOHNSON, JOHN, Marston, innkeeper. Ct. York. Pat. Feb. 15. Order. Feb. 15. KNIGHT, ARTHUR (trading as Arthur Knight and Co.), Preston, general draper. Ct. MASTERS, WALTER WILLIAM (trading as W. W. Masters and Co.), Swansea, colliery agent. Ct. Swansea. Pet. Jan. 27. Order, Feb. 17. OWEN, MARY, Ruabon, licensed victualler, widow. Ct. Wrexham. Pet. Feb. 3. RICHMOND. HENRY, Tottenham, florist. Ct. Edmonton. ROSSITER, WILLIAM ROBERT. jun. (trading as Rossiter Brothers), Staple Hill, boot manufacturer. Ct. Bristol. Pet. Feb. 5. Order, Feb. 16. RHODES, JAMES, late Cardiff. Ct. Cardiff. Pet. Jan. 20. Order, Feb. 15. To surrender at the High Court of Justice, in Bankruptcy. OLLIVER, SPENCER ALWYNE, late Newport Pagnell, gentleman. Pet. Feb. 18. SANCHEZ and Co., Eastcheap. fruit merchants. Pet. Jan. 1. Order. Feb. 18. WATKINS, ARTHUR JAMES, late Croydon, grocer. Pet. Jan. 26. Order, Feb 18. To surrender at their respective District Courts. BECKERLEG, ARTHUR JAMES, Redruth, baker. CORNWELL, WILLIAM EDWIN, Cardiff, butcher. Feb. 18. Ct. Peterborough. Pet. Feb. 20. Ct. Truro. Pet. Feb. 19. Order, Ct. Cardiff. Pet. Feb. 18. Order, DAY, J., late Hampton, builder. Ct. Brentford. Pet. Jan. 19. Order, Feb. 19. DAWSON, WILLIAM ALFRED, Southampton, baker. Ct. Southampton. Pet. Feb. 18. Order. Feb. 18. EDGAR, EDWIN LAURENCE, Croydon, builder. Ct. Croydon. Pet. Feb. 18. Order, Feb. 18. Order, Feb. 19. FOORD, ROBERT, Ramsgate, baker. Ct. Canterbury. Pet. Feb. 19. GREIG, JOSEPH TETLEY, Leeds, butcher. Ct. Leeds. Pet. Feb. 18. Order. Feb. 18. Pet. Feb. 18. Order, HARFORD. FRANK, Cefnpennar, fishmonger. Ct. Aberdare. Feb. 18. HURT, WILLIAM, Aberdare, fishmonger. Ct Aberdare. Pet Feb. 18. Order, Feb. 18. HULL, EDWARD (late trading as Edward Hall, and Tavlorand Co.), late Birmingham, builder. Ct. Birmingham. Pet. Feb. 19. Order, Feb. 19. KEATES, WILLIAM. Cirencester, tailor. Ct. Swinden. Pet. Feb. 19. Order, Feb. 19. PEARSON, JAMES, Milton-next-Sittingbourne, builder. Ct. Rochester. Pet. Feb. 19. PARKER. ANNIE, Roecliffe, farmer, widow. Ct York. Pet. Feb 17. Order. Feb. 17. ROBERTS, JAMES, Eaton Bray, farmer. Ct Luton. Pet. Feb. 20. Order. Feb. 20. RHODES, JOHN, Wakefield, commercial traveller. Ct. Wakefle'd. Pet. Feb 19. Order, Feb. 19. Ross, ANN, Wigan, innkeeper. Ct. Wigan. Pet. Feb. 19. Order Feb. 19. SAUL. FRANK HENRY (trading as Saul and Co). Crewe, commission agent. Ct. Birmingham. Pet. Feb. 17. Order, Feb. 17. SHERWOOD, FREDERICK, Birmingham, lamp manufacturer. Ct. Birmingham. Pet. Feb. 4., Order, Feb. 18. SHERWOOD, ISAAC, jnn., Birmingham, lamp manufacturer. Ct. Birmingham. Pet. Feb. 4. Order, Feb 18. STANCER, HENRY, Kingston-upon-Hull, plumber. Ct. Kingston-upon-Hull. Pet. Fab. 18. Order, Feb 18. SMITH, JAMES, Bradford, Yorks, commission manufacturer. Ct. Bradford. Pet. Feb. 20. Order. Feb. 20. SIBLEY, WILLIAM. Watford, farmer. Ct. St. Albans. Pet. Feb. 17. Order. Feb. 17. THIRSK, JAMES ERNEST, Andover, miller. Ct. Salisbury. Pet. Feb 18. Order, Feb. 18. TOMLINSON, GEORGE WITHNALL. Newport, Mon., solicitor. Ct. Newport. Pet Feb. 20. Order, F-b. 20. THOMAS, ELIAS, late Gilfach Goch, builder. Ct. Pontypridd. Pet. Feb. 18. Order, Feb. 18. TINDALL, ARTHUR. Burnley, tailor. Ct. Burnley. Pet. Feb. 18. Order, Feb. 18. WINE, ESTHER, Leeds, wholesale clothier. Ct. Leeds. Pet. Feb. 19. Order. Feb. 19. Ct. WILLIAMS, HARRY (trading as Williams and Co ), Birmingham, cabinetmaker. Birmingham. Pet. Jan. 29. Order, Feb. 12. The following amended notice is substituted for that published in the Gazette of Feb. 19. OLIVEIRA. ALEXANDER, Manchester, advertising agent. Ct. Manchester. Pet. Jan. 20. Order, Feb. 16. FIRST MEETINGS AND PUBLIC EXAMINATIONS. GAZETTE, FEB. 19. Ct. Great Exam. AYRE. MATTHEW FRED (trading as Charles Ayre), Scunthorpe, grocer. ABEL. FREDERICK ROWLINSON, Wolverhampton, coach spring manufacturer. BACKWAY, THOMAS, late Bideford, builder. Ct. Barnstaple. Meeting. March 2, BARRETT, SAMUEL, Crosshills. late managing director Keighley Laundry Engineering Company Limited. Ct. Bradford, Yorks. Meeting, March 1, at 11, at office of Off. Rec Bradford. Exam, March 2, at 10, at County Court, Bradford. BOOTH, HENRY, Romford, builder. Ct. Chelmsford. Meeting, March 1. at 3, at 95, Temple-chmbrs, Temple-av. Exam. March 3, at 11, at Shirehall, Chelmsford. BARRIE, ALEXANDER, and AYLWARD, CHARLES FREDERICK, Leicester, grocers. Ct. Leicester. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 12.30, at office of Off. Rec. Leicester. Exam. March 4, at 10, at the Castle, Leicester. Meeting, Feb. 26, at noon, at 65, High-st, Merthyr Tydfil. Exam. March 23, at 11, at Court-house, Pontypridd. BARLOW, JOHN THOMAS, Middlesbrough, club manager. Ct. Stockton-on-Tees and Middlesbrough. Meeting, March 3, at 3, at office of Off. Rec. Middlesbrough. Exam. March 3, at 10.30, at Court-house, Stockton-on-Tees. COSTIN, FREDERICK, Harlesden, mercantile clerk. Ct. High Court. Meeting, March 1, at 11, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. Exam. March 17, at 12.30, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. CRELLIN, H., Hanover-sq, ladies' tailor. Ct. High Court. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 2.30, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. Exam. March 17, at 12.30, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. COTTRELL, WILLIAM HENRY, Cardiff, builder. Ct. Cardiff, Meeting. March 2, at 11, at office of Off. Rec. Cardiff. Exam. March 30, at 10, at Townhall, Cardiff. COX, ARTHUR, Ilkeston, bricklayer. Ct. Derby. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 11, at office of Off. Rec. Derby. Exam. March 9, at 11, at County-hall, Derby. COX, FRANK, Drewsteignton, baker. Ct. Exeter. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 11, at office of Off. Rec. Exeter. Exam. March 11, at 11.30, at the Castle, Exeter. CLARKE, CHARLES LEIGH (trading as the Northern Counties Electric Construction BOWEN, EVAN, Tonypandy, carpenter. Ct. Pontypridd. Company), Manchester, electrical engineer. Ct. Manchester. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 2.30, at office of Off. Rec. Manchester. Exam. March 1, at 11, at Court-house, Manchester. Tyne. COWARD, JOHN (trading as John Coward and Co.), Newcastle-on-Tyne. merchant. Ct. High Court. Meeting, March 2, at 2.80, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. Exam. March 18, at 11.30, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. EVERATT, GEORGE PALFRAMAN, Selby, tailor. Ct. York. Meeting, March 2, at 12.30, Meeting, March 3, at 11.30, at Midland hotel, Station-st, Burton-on-Trent. Exam. March 3, at noon, at Court-house, Burton-on-Trent. HAY, the Hon. ALISTAIR GEORGE, Upper Belgrave-st. Ct. High Court. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 230, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. Exam. March 25, at 11, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. HILL, SARAH ANN (trading as S. Hill), late Leicester, boot dealer. Ct Leicester. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 3, at office of Off. Rec. Leicester. Exam. March 4, at 10, at the Castle, Leicester. HILL, ALBERT, Nottingham, hosier. Ct. Nottingham. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 11, at office of Off. Rec. Nottingham. Exam. March 5, at 10, at County Court-house, Nottingham. JONES, JOHN WILLIAM. Rhyl, joiner. Ct. Bangor. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 3.80, at Royal hotel, Rhyl. Exam. March 4, at 12.15, at Magistrates'-room, Bangor. JONES, THOMAS BOOTH, Prestwich, farmer. Ct. Salford. Meeting. Feb. 26, at 3, at office of Off. Rec. Manchester. Exam. March 10, at 2.30, at Court-house, Salford, JOHNSON, JOHN, Marston, innkeeper. Ct. York. Meeting, March 1, at 12.30, at office of Off. Rec. York. Exam. March 5, at 11, at Courts of Justice, York. MADDER, CHARLES, Bedford, jobmaster. Ct. Bedford. Meeting, March 1, at 11, at office of Off. Rec. Bedford. Exam. March 16, at 11, at Shirehall, Bedford. MIDDUP, HENRY, Calverton, late licensed victualler. Ct. Nottingham. Meeting, Feb. 26, at noon, at office of Off. Rec. Nottingham. Exam. March 5, at 10, at County Court-house, Nottingham. MORRIS, TOHN (trading as C. Morris), Wrexham, tailor. Ct. Wrexham. Meeting, Feb. 26, at noon, at the Priory, Wrexham. Exam. March 9, at noon, at Countyhall, Wrexham. PATMAN, DAVID, Barton, coal dealer. Ct. Cambridge. Meeting, March 2, at noon, at office of Off. Rec. Cambridge. Exam. March 17, at 11, at Guildhall, Cambridge. POOLE, HARRY JAMES, Comberton, butcher. Ct. Cambridge. Meeting, March 2, at noon, at office of Off. Rec. Cambridge. Exam. March 17, at 11, at Guildhall, Cambridge. PITTS, WILLIAM, Cheriton Bishop, farmer. Ct. Exeter. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 11, at office of Off. Rec. Exeter. Exam. March 11, at 11.30, at the Castle, Exeter. SISSLING, GEORGE KING, Long Eaton, lace manufacturer. Ct. Derby. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 3.30, at Flying Horse hotel, Nottingham. Exam. March 9, at 11, at County-ball, Derby. SCOTT, FREDERICK, West Cowes, butcher. Ct Newport and Ryde. Meeting, March 1, at 10.30, at 19, Quay-st, Newport. Exam. March 1, at noon, at Courthouse, Newport. SHAW, JOHN JAMES, St. Anne's-on-the-Sea, stonemason. Ct. Preston. Meeting, SPACIE, THOMAS, Aston, grocer. Ct. Sheffield. Meeting, Feb 26, at 2, at office of Off. TAYLOR, WILLIAM JAMES, Hove, builder. Ct. Brighton. Meeting, Feb. 26, at noon, at office of Off. Rec. Brighton. Exam. March 4, at 11, at Court-nouse, Brighton. WRIGHT, PHILIP, Ryhall, farmer. Ct. Peterborough. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 3, at Law Courts, Peterborough. Exam. March 12, at noon, at Law Courts, Peterborough. WAIGHT, HENRY BYATT, and WAIGHT, JAMES (trading as Waight and Son), Portland, builders. Ct. Dorchester. Meeting, Feb. 26, at 12.30, at office of Off. Rec. Salisbury. Exam. March 12, at 10.15, at County-hall, Dorchester. GAZETTE, FEB. 23. ALEXANDER, SARA (trading as Madame S. Turn), Upper-st, Islington, ladies' outfitter. Ct. High Court. Meeting, March 2, at 11, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. Exam. March 24, at 11, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. ALLEN, JOSIAH (trading as J. Allen and Son), Hendon, builder. Ct. Barnet. Meeting, March 2, at 3, at 95, Temple-chmors, Temple-av. Exam. March 10, at 11, at Townhall, Barnet. BATEMAN, ROWLAND, Harrington-mansion, Shaftesbury-av, gentleman Ct. High Court. Meeting, March 4, at 1, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. Exam. March 24, at 11, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. BISHOP, FREDERICK (trading as J. Bishop and Co.), Bristol, coal merchant. Ct. BRANCH, WILLIAM, Bettws, collier. Ct. Cardiff. Meeting, March 4, at 11, at office of BRAZEL, WILLIAM, Swansea, baker. Ct. Swansea. Meeting, March 2. at noon, at offices of Off. Rec., Swansea. Exam. March 18, at 11.30, at Townhall, Swansea. BECKERLEG, ARTHUR JAMES, Redruth, baker. Ct. Truro. Meeting, March 4, at noon, at office of Off. Rec. Truro. Exam. March 20, at 11.45, at Townhall, Truro. BEDDOE, EDWARD CLARENCE, Walsall, engineer. Ct. Walsall. Meeting, March 4, CLARKE, HARRY, Birmingham. Ct. Birmingham. Meeting, March 3, at 11, at 23, at noon, at office of Off. Rec. Nottingham. Exam. March 17, at 11.30, at County Court-house, Nottingham. CONSITT, WILLIAM STRATFORD, North Ormesby, beerhouse-keeper. Ct. Stockton-on- COLLINS, WILLIAM, late Longdon, farmer. Ct. Walsall. Meeting, March 4, at 10.30, DAVIS, DAVID, Old Ford-rd, Bow, saddler. Ct. High Court. Meeting, March 2, at 1, DICKER, ELIZABETH ANNIE, Great Yarmouth, widow. Ct. Great Yarmouth. Meeting, EVANS, NATHANIEL, Llanelly, grocer. Ct. Carmarthen. Meeting, March 3, at 3, at office of Off. Rec. Carmarthen. Exam. March 3, at 11, at Guildhall, Carmarthen. FENTON, FREDERICK, and SUNDERLAND, WILLIAM, Carlisle, printers. Ct. Carlisle. Meeting, March 8, at 4, at office of Off. Rec. Carlisle. Exam. March 8, at 11, at Court-house, Carlisle. GAMES, FREDERICK JOHN (described in receiving order as F. G. Games), Gloucester-pl, Portman-sq. Ct. High Court. Meeting, March 2, at 11, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. Exam. March 25, at 11.30, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. GLEVES, J., Wolfington-rd, West Norwood, builder. Ct. High Court. Meeting, March 2, at 2.30, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. Exam. April 1, at 11.80, at Bankruptcybldgs. GOODMAN, WILLIAM LAW, Holborn-bars, insurance agent. Ct. High Court. Meeting, March 3, at noon, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. Exam. March 25, at 11.30, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. GRIFFITHS, BENJAMIN GEORGE, Pembroke, butcher. Ct. Pembroke Dock. Meeting, March 5, at 3, at Temperance hall, Pembroke Dock. Exam. March 5, at 11.30, at Temperance-hall, Pembroke Dock. HART, FRANCIS J. ERNEST, Strand, promoter of public companies. Ct. High Court. Meeting. March 2, at noon, at Bankruptcy-b dgs. Exam. April 1, at 11, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. HOUSE, SELINA, late Gipsy Hill, licensed victnaller, widow. Ct. High Court. Meeting, March 3, at 11, at Bankruptcy-bldgs, Exam. March 25, at noon, at Bankruptesbldgs. HARDING, JOHN, Bristol, corn merchant. Ct. Bristol. Meeting, March 3, at 12.30, at office of Off. Rec. Bristol. Exam. March 12, at noon, at Guildhall, Bristol. HERON, EDWARD GEORGE, Leeds, tailor. Ct. Leeds. Meeting, March 3, at 11, at office of Off. Rec. Leeds. Exam. March 9, at 11, at County Court-house, Leeds. HEBDEN, WILLIAM, Brighton, late music-hall proprietor. Ct. Wakefield. Meeting, March 2. at 11, at office of Off. Rec. Wakefield. Exam. March 4, at 11, at Courthouse, Wakefield. JONES, ROBERT, Penmorfa, labourer. Ct. Portmadoc and Blaenau Festiniog. Meeting, March 25, at 11.30, at Sportsman hotel, Portmadoc. Exam. March 25, at noon, at Police-court, Portmadoc. KNIGHT, ARTHUR (trading as Arthur Knight and Co.), Preston, general draper. Cs. Preston. Meeting, March 5, at 2, at office of Off. Rec. Preston. Exam. March 5, at 11, at County Court-offices, Preston. MAY, HENRY, West Bromwich, sweep. Ct. West Bromwich. Meeting, March 3, at 2.5, at County Court, West Bromwich. Exam. March 3, at 2.15, at County Court, West Bromwich. MOORE, JOSIAS, South Milton, haulier. Ct. Plymouth and East Stonehouse. Meeting, March 4, at 10, at 10, Athenæum-ter, Plymouth. Exam. March 4, at 11, at Townhall, East Stonehouse. MARSHALL, JOHN, Fixby, farmer. Ct. Halifax. Meeting, March 16, at 11, at office of Off. Rec. Halifax. Exam. March 16, at 2, at County Court-house, Halifax. OLIVEIRA, ALEXANDER, Manchester, advertising agent. Ct. Manchester. Meeting, March 3, at 3, at office of Off. Rec. Manchester. Exam. March 15, at 11, at Courthouse, Manchester. PARKE, GERTRUDE MARY, late Thornton-rd, Clapham Park, sanatorium-keeper, spinster. Ct. High Court. Meeting, March 3, at 1, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. Exam. March 19, at noon, at Bankruptcy-bldgs. PRICE, JOHN WILLIAM, Oldbury, licensed victualler. Ct. West Bromwich. Meeting, March 3, at 2, at County Court, West Bromwich. Exam. March 3, at 2.15, at County Court, West Bromwich. PARKER, ANNIE, Roecliffe, farmer. Ct. York. Meeting, March 3, at 12.30, at offices TUCKER, HENRY, and TUCKER, GEORGE JOHN (trading as Richard Tucker and Sons), NOTICE OF DAY APPOINTED FOR PROCEEDING WITH PUBLIC |