Stock Exchange had been extensive before he went into practice. He also had betting transactions, but only to a small amount. He sometimes dealt with outside brokers in buying and selling stock. He kept a record of his gains and losses so that he knew roughly what his position was. He attributed his losses to Stock speculations, betting, depreciation in the value of securities, and bad debts. His small ledger furnished a tabulated statement of his Stock Exchange transactions. After commencing practice he entered into betting dealings, and last autumn very extensive ones. They were for large amounts, and sometimes he lost and sometimes won. No records of these transactions was kept; they were destroyed because he thought he should have no other use for them. The principal amounts were with a man named Lambert, and another named Donoghue, and there were some small ones with local men. He was led into betting by the hope of getting back what he had lost. His practice did not grow much, but he considered he was doing well and that he would be able to make up a good business. He had received £650 from Miss Ida Pratt as a loan in 1890, for investment: £475 10s. from a second sister, and £210 from a third sister. He also had £1300 from his mother and £250 from Miss Relf for investment in the purchase of shares. He further had £673 from his brother last June, and an overdraft of £2063 from the bankers, making a total of £6163. His deficiency was £5133. He did not represent that any portion of this had been lost in his legitimate business as a solicitor. The shares for Miss Relf were purchased, and he sold them without her knowledge, and they were credited to his account. She had not had the money, but it was his intention to pay it. He received the £600 from his brother about a fortnight before he went away. His statement of accounts showed he had lost £4000 in about fifteen months, and this all went in speculation; his losses between Stock Exchange business and betting were very nearly equal. In June he paid £1100 to Lambert. He went away in consequence of a large debt coming due to Lambert. He went away without any preparation, and there was no squaring" of any creditors. For the last three months, or a little less time, he knew his position was helpless, but previous to that time he thought he should recover himself. He handed some of his stockbroking creditors some script, because he thought his next account might be a a heavy one; and he had no idea then of leaving. He made no resolution to go away until the day he started. The shares the script of which he sent to the brokers were his own property. It was about 3.30 one Saturday that he left Norwich. He saw that his loss on the turf would be a heavy one, and he determined to go away. He drew £25 from Gurneys, and £44, his balance at the Stamford and Spalding Bank, and went off. He took the whole of this money away with him, but no securities, and he did not tell anyone where he was going. On the Saturday night he left for Liverpool, and crossed the Atlantic for Toronto. He saw a notice in the Times respecting his bankruptcy, and came back, but practically all the £69 had gone. His bankers had some deeds deposited with them as his, but they did not belong to him. During the present year he had paid over £2000 in stock speculations and betting transactions. Besides the two banks mentioned he also had an account with the National Provincial, but this was closed. The statement of his affairs filed by him showed the whole of his estate with the exception of the £69, and he recollected no other liabilities than those he had mentioned. Lambert's claim was about £600 or £700, but he believed that had been withdrawn, or his deficiency would be increased by that amount. One of his liabilities (£3100) was due to his mother, brother, and sisters. He set a man named Cook up in business as a tobacconist, and an arrangement was made with his creditors. Cook was £190 in his debt, and he took the business over. He found the business did not answer, and Smith was appointed the new manager. An account was opened in Smith's name to the extent of £120, and out of this 12s. 6d. in the pound was paid to Cook's creditors. He took a lease of premises in London-street, where Smith carried on business. A circular was sent out stating that Smith had taken the business over; but he (debtor) regarded it as his, although he intended to make it over. There was £202 12s. 7d. due to witness in respect of this tobacco business. Smith was quite a stranger to him, but he had seen Cook at Sprague's shop, where he bought his tobacco, and he took him up, as he thought he would make a tobacconist's business do very well. His private expenditure amounted to about 50s. per week. No creditor was present to ask any questions, and the examination was closed.

AT Newtown, on the 27th ult., Charles Jones, solicitor, of Welshpool, came up for his adjourned examination, before Mr. Registrar Talbot. E. Powell appeared for the debtor, and the Official Receiver (Mr. J. D. Davies, of Llanidloes) was present. The gross liabilities are £7235 10s. 3d., of which £3266 5s. 10d. is expected to rank as dividend. The assets amount to £887 10s. 7d., leaving a deficiency of £2378 15s. 3d. Mr. Sandywell, formerly managing clerk to the debtor, was again examined in private. The debtor, in reply to the official receiver, said he simply knew nothing about Henry Smith's affair, and he never authorised Sandywell to do anything. If Sandywell borrowed money from Mr. Smith, and deposited two promissory notes and deeds belonging to Mr. J. Davies, of Forden, he certainly did it without his authority, and he (the debtor) never got the money. The debtor said he believed the notes were indorsed, and if they passed through the bank the endorsements would be in his handwriting. If Sandywell received the money from Mr. Smith it was certainly not for his (the debtor's) use. Asked if he told Mr. Buffrey that there were three prior mortgages on the house, office, and premises occupied by Mr. Yearsley, and that this would be the fourth, the debtor said he could not have done so. He believed the house and office had since been sold, but he could not ascertain for how much. He had no account to show that that statement made by Mr. Sandywell was wrong. An account was prepared by Mr. Sandywell which he thought correct; it showed a balance due to him (the debtor) of about £600. The amount

was claimed, but the claim was compromised. He denied, to his knowledge, having received funds from the Yearsley estate for which he had not accounted, and the statement that he had appropriated £1000 from that estate was false.-Mr. Pryce Yearsley, solicitor, Welshpool, put in a receipt for £175, dated the 12th Oct. 1891, given by the debtor in discharge of all claims against the Yearsley estate. The debtor, continuing, said he authorised his son to sign cheques "per pro," but not Mr. Sandywell. Mr. Sandywell said the £1000 he said Mr. Jones appropriated to his own use had nothing to do with the claim of £600 on the receipt just produced. Mr. Yearsley, in reply to the official receiver, said he never claimed the £1000 referred to, for the simple reason that he knew nothing about it until it came out in the course of that examination. Mr. E. H. Jones, the debtor's son, said he had been in practice in Welspool since 1887. He was not a partner in the business, but he took over his father's Llanfair business, and paid him £200 for it. The money belonged to his wife. When he began business on his own account he continued to occupy the room he had previously occupied in his father's office. He believed his father authorised him to sign cheques about Oct. 1889. At that time there was an overdraft at the bank of £980, and Mr. Powell, the manager, wished it reduced. At that time his father was very ill, and he promised Mr. Powell it should be reduced to £500, which was done. He then asked his advice as to what had better be done as to the signing of cheques, and it was his father's wish that he should sign the cheques in order to see what went out of the bank. His father retained the right to sign as well, and in the absence of witness he did sign, and his cheques were honoured. The overdraft was secured, the security being some property to the value of £518, which would leave a surplus after meeting the overdraft. He knew nothing about the affair with Henry Smith, of Welshpool. Asked if he knew the business was in a bad state in 1889, Mr. Jones said the bank was the worst that he knew of. He had received moneys on behalf of his father since he was authorised to sign cheques, and he had paid about £1500 into the bank. Supposing he were a creditor, there would be due to him, or rather to his wife, £1400 or £1500.-The examination then closed.

10s." Then

IN the Chancery Division, on the 1st inst., before North, J., an application was made, in the matter of Re Mahon, by some solicitors to review a taxing master's taxation of costs. The question arose upon the construction of schedule 2 to the General Order prescribing the remuneration of solicitors under the provisions of the Solicitors' Remuneration Act of 1881. The first head in schedule 2 is, "Instructions for and drawing and perusing deeds, wills, and other documents." Under this head the schedule provides, "Such fees for instructions as, having regard to the care and labour required, the number and lengths of the papers to be perused, and the other circumstances of the case, may be fair and reasonable. In ordinary cases, as to drawing, &c., the allowance shall be-for drawing 2s. per folio." The next head is attendances," and as to them the schedule says "In ordinary cases comes this clause- "In extraordinary cases, the taxing master may increase or diminish the above charge if for any special reasons he shall think fit." In the present case the solicitors had in their bill of costs charged their client a fee of 10s. each for eighty-three attendances. The client required a taxation of the bill, and the taxing master disallowed ten of the attendances entirely; he allowed the 10s. for thirty attendances; and for each of the remaining forty-three attendances he reduced the fee to 6s. 8d. The solicitors objected to this reduction, and carried in written objections to the taxation. The taxing master had also in two instances reduced the fee for "drawing" a case for the opinion of counsel to 1s. per folio, instead of 2s., and to this reduction also the solicitors objected. No objection was raised as to the ten attendances which were entirely disallowed, and the client made no objection to the thirty for which 10s. each was allowed. The solicitors objected to the reduction to 6s. 8d. with regard to a large number (but not the whole) of the forty-three attendances. With regard to the "attendances they said in their objections" Those were ordinary attendances in an ordinary case for which solicitors are entitled to charge 10s. under schedule 2 of the General Order, and it is submitted that, not being an extraordinary case, a taxing master has no discretionary power to diminish such charges, and even if he had, there must be some special reason for the reduction." As to the other point, the solicitors said, "A case to counsel is a 'document' under schedule 2, which of all others requires care and labour, and 2s. per folio is the proper charge." In his answers to the objections the taxing master said, "In the present case many of the attendances were of an extraordinarily simple character, as will be found on reference to the items themselves. In cases of extraordinary difficulty I can well understand the taxing master having discretion to increase the 10s. for an attendance, but I fail to comprehend his having a like discretion to diminish the fee in exceptionally difficult cases.

Does

it not, therefore, follow that in extraordinarily simple cases the master has power to diminish the 10s. where in his discretion he thinks it proper to do so? Unless this be so, is not the second schedule unintelligible? In taxing costs under the Act (second schedule) it has been the uniform custom and practice of all the Masters in the Chancery Division to exercise their discretion in dealing with items of the description comprised in this objection, and the case, Re Reade (33 Sols. Journ. 219) seems not only to justify their custom and practice, but to go much further, for according to my reading of that case, the Master's discretion would seem to include the whole of the items covered by Schedule 3." With regard to the other objection the taxing master said: "In the view the objectors take it may assist them by my stating, as the fact is, that the case in question, so far from being of an extraordinary nature, was of a very simple character. Under the second schedule the taxing masters, one and all, allow 1s. per folio for drawing a case for opinion of counsel Further, if my reading of Re Reade be correct, the master's discretion

would again come in. In this matter, I am clearly of opinion that, if I have any discretion, 1s. per folio is ample for the case in question." The taxing master accordingly overruled both the objections. The solicitors took out a summons to review the taxation.

Sir H. Davey, Q.C. and R. F. Norton were for the solicitors; J. G. Butcher was for the client.

NORTH, J., affrmed the decision of the taxing master as regarded the "attendances," but reversed it as regarded the fee of 1s. per folio for drawing cases for opinion of counsel, allowing instead the full fee of 2s. His Lordship held that the taxing master had a discretion under Schedule 2. The schedule distinguishes between "ordinary " and " extraordinary" cases, and the fees mentioned applied to "ordinary"—that is fair, average, normal cases; but the taxing master had a discretion either to increase or diminish the fee in cases which were not ordinary, according to their nature. He must have special reasons, but it was not necessary that he should state them. He must act upon special reasons In the present case his Lordship held that the taxing master had, as regarded the "attendances," exercised his discretion, and his Lordship could not interfere. As regarded the fee for drawing, the taxing master had not exercised his discretion at all. He had acted upon a practice in the Taxing Master's office and had said he did not see any reason for allowing more. If he had said he thought it was a case in which only half the ordinary fee of 2s. should be allowed, his Lordship could not have reviewed his exercise of discretion. But, in fact, he had not exercised any discretion. His Lordship thought that the 2s. fee ought to be allowed, and he did not see any reason for sending the case back to the taxing master. No costs would be given on either side.

AT the Guildhall, on the 27th ult., the case of Westmacott v. Burr was tried before Lawrance, J. and a special jury. Mr. G. F. Westmacott, a solicitor of Newcastle, sought to recover damages from the defendant, Mr. H. Burr, for having been, by fraudulent misrepresentation, induced to take shares which were valueless.

Lawson Walton, Q.C., said the plaintiff was connected with a large firm of Newcastle solicitors, and the defendant could be most compendiously described as a promoter. Mr. Burr brought forward a proposal for a company to be called the "Danube Minerals Company." The owners and subsequent vendors of the property were a Captain Inglis and a Mr. Kidd. The two were to get £100,000 for the property-£60,000 in shares and £40,000 in cash. The defendant was to get £20,000 in shares, and his payment depended on the company going to allotment. He therefore had a great interest in the starting of the company. Mr. Westmacott was invited to become solicitor of the company, and to get a director from the North of England. A gentleman named Ward, on his invitation, became a director. Mr. Burr, without the knowledge of Mr. Westmacott, issued underwriting agreements and proceeded to make a market. He did so by inducing Captain Inglis to go on the market and buy shares at a premium before the company had gone to allotment, and for this purpose the defendant provided £1000 from the Reversionary Securities Company. Mr. Burr subsequently telegraphed on the 23rd Nov. at the starting of the company, "Danube collieries very favourably received." Two days afterwards another telegram was received, saying "Shares dealt in at premium," and in a letter Mr. Burr said that £50,000 had been subscribed the first day. Later, when the question of allotment came up, it was found that only £33,000 in shares had been subscribed in all, and of these £20,000 were underwriters' shares. Mr. Westmacott was induced to take 600 shares before he learned that the market had been made in the manner described. He had been compelled to pay for his shares to the company, and he now sought to recover the money from Mr. Burr, the company's agent, by whose misrepresentations he had been induced to subscribe.

Mr. Walter Gribbon, the secretary of the company, said that 33,000 shares were subscribed for in all. It was absolutely untrue that he told Mr. Burr that 50,000 were subscribed for the first day.

Winch, Q.C., for the defence, said, the plaintiff's case was that by a lying telegram and letter he had been induced to part with his money. The plaintiff's brother-in-law obtained the option for the purchase of a mine in Hungary, and in order to pay the deposit of £1000, he applied to the Reversionary Company for assistance. That assistance was given on condition that, in addition to the £1000 being paid back to the company, Of one-fifth of any profit from the mine should be paid to the company. course Mr. Burr was interested in the success of the company, as in the event of its success he was to receive on behalf of his company 20,000 fully paid-up shares. Plaintiff himself was perfectly acquainted with all the facts. Who were Capt. Inglis and Mr. King? Relatives of the plaintiff. Whatever was done by the plaintiff in the matter he did with his eyes open, being of opinion that it was a good thing, and that he was likely to get a profit out of it. Mr. H. Burr, the defendant, said he was managing director of the Reversionary and General Securities Company, of which Capt. Inglis was chairman. Witness went to Budapest with Mr. Westmacott as Capt. Inglis's agent, and had a power of attorney from him. The plaintiff went as the company's solicitor.

Cross-examined by Walton, Q.C., the witness said he was a brother of Mr. Arthur Burr. He was charged with his brother and others at Marlborough-street with defrauding Mr. Gervoise, and the case was sent for trial. The charge against witness was dismissed. He did not know that £5500 was paid by the defendants to settle the case. As to the present matter, he knew of no underwriter except an agreement as to the shares of the Danube collieries after the 23rd Nov. It was in the office of Messrs. Burdett and Harris, stock jobbers, that he learned that the shares had been dealt in at premium. Witness knew nothing about promoting companies.

After hearing other evidence the judge summed up, and the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for the full amount claimed, £400. His Lordship gave judgment accordingly, and refused to stay execution.

Ar the Brompton County Court, on Thursday, before his Honour Judge Stonor, Crump, Q.C. and Hollams appeared on behalf of the Incorporated Law Society in support of an application to commit a person named Vague, alleged to have acted as a solicitor, being unqualified. His Honour at once said he had no jurisdiction to issue an attachment for such an offence. Reference was made to sect. 2 of the Solicitors Act of 1843, and to sect. 26 of the Act of 1860; also to the case of Reg. v. Lefroy (28 L. T. Rep. N. S. 132; L. Rep. 8 Q. B. 134), and to sect. 161 of the County Courts Act of 1888, and it was urged that the action of an unqualified person in using the process of the court and acting as a solicitor of the court was a contempt of court for which the judge had power to commit. His Honour was clearly of a contrary opinion, and declined to hear the application.

On the 31st ult. a petition was filed in the Wolverhampton County Court against Thomas Gatis, of No. 16, Compton-road, and 9, King-street, Wolverhampton, solicitor. The debtor formerly traded in copartnership with William Henry Sale, under the style of the Victoria Manufacturing Company, in Darlington-street, Wolverhampton, as patent spring manufacturers. The Official Receiver (Mr. E. Pritchard) has been constituted receiver of the estate, and the public examination will take place on the 21st Nov. Mr. H. B. Hill, Queen-square, is the debtor's solicitor.

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.] JEFFERSON (Edward John Cummins), Westoe, South Shields, Durham, alleged deceased. £1616 9s. 8d. £2 15s. per Cent. Consolidated Stock, late New Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimant, William Jefferson, the Attorney Administrator o f the said E. J. C. Jefferson. Oct. 26.

APPOINTMENTS UNDER THE JOINT-STOCK WINDING-UP ACTS. ALBOLINE OIL AND VARNISH COMPANY LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Nov. 9, before the Court sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand. Dawson, Ainslie, and Martineau, 28, Bedford-row, solicitors, for the petitioner. Notices of intention to appear on the hearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm or his or their solicitor (if any), and must reach the above-named not later than six o'clock on Nov. 8.

ATLAS SPINNING COMPANY LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Nov. 17, at twelve o'clock, at the Lancashire County Court sitting at the Townhall, Ashton-under-Lyne. Addleshaw and Warburton, 15, Norfolk-street, Manchester, solicitors for the petitioners. Notices of intention to appear on the hearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm, or his or their solicitors (if any), and must reach the above-named not later than six o'clock on Nov. 16. BLACKPOOL ELECTRIC TRAMWAY COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Nov. 30, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. J. Oddie, Halifax, Yorkshire, the liquidator of the company. Godfrey Rhodes and Evans, Commercial Bankchmbrs, Halifax, solicitors for liquidator.

BRITON FERRY PATENT CARBON FUEL COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Dec. 22, their names and addresses, and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. M. G. Roberts, Briton Ferry, Glamorganshire, the liquidator of the company. M. A. Jenkins, Aberavon, Port Talbot, Glamorgan, solicitor for the liquidator.

B. BERTWISTLE AND CO. LIMITED.-Creditors who have not yet sent in particulars of their claims to send in, by Dec. 3, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, to Mr. E. Foden, 18, Hargreaves-st, Burnley, Lancashire, or to Mr. J. Rawlinson, 7, Grimshaw-st, Burnley, the liquidator of the company. Artindale and Southern, 4, Hargreaves-st, Burnley, solicitors for the liquidator. CIVIL SERVICE BREWERY COMPANY LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Nov. 9, before the Court sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand. Saunders, Hawksford, Bennett, and Co., 68, Coleman-st, solicitors for the petitioners. Notices of intention to appear on the hearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm, or his or their solicitors (if any), and must reach the above-named not later than six o'clock on Nov. 8.

GAMGEE STEAM GENERATORS LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Nov. 9, before the Courts sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand. R. Chapman, 92, London-wall, solicitor, petitioner in person. Notices of intention to appear on the hearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm, or his or their solicitor (if any), and must reach the above-named not later than six o'clock on Nov. 8.

HOUSE INVESTORS' CORPORATION LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Nov. 9, before the Court sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand. Morten, Cutler, and Co., 99, Newgate-st, solicitors for the petitioner. Notices of intention to appear on the hearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm, or his or their solicitor (if any), and must reach the above-named not later than six o'clock on Nov. 8.

HIGHGATE AND HAMPSTEAD CABLE TRAMWAYS LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Dec. 1, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. F. W. White, 11, St. Helen's-pl, the liquidator of the company. W. Webb and Co., 181, Strand, solicitors for the liquidator.

INTERNATIONAL ELECTRIC SYNDICATE LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Nov. 9, before the Court sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand. M. Webb and Sons, Barbican-chmbrs, Aldersgate, solicitors for the petitioner.

JONES SYNDICATE LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Nov. 9, before the Court sitting at the High Courts of Justice. If at the hearing of the petition it shall appear that a resolution for the voluntary winding-up of the company has been duly passed, and a liquidator thereof appointed, then in the alternative that, the company may be wound-up subject to the supervision of the court. Halses Trustram, and Co., 61, Cheapside, solicitors for the petitioner. Notices of intention to appear on the hearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm, or his or their solicitor (if any), and must reach the above-named not later than six o'clock on Nov. 8.

JEWELLERS' BANKRUPTCY SYNDICATE LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Nov. 9, before the Court sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand. T. Lovell, Monument-bldgs, petitioner's solicitor. Notices of intention to appear on the hearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm, or his or their solicitor (if any), and must reach the above-named not later than six o'clock on Nov. 8. LIVERPOOL AND ST. HELENS LIGHTERAGE COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Dec. 6, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, to Mr. J. H. Shaw, 4, Harrington-st, Liverpool, the liquidator of the company.

LONDON COMMERCIAL ASSOCIATION LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Nov. 9, before the Court sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand. Woodcock, Ryland, and Parker, 15, Bloomsbury-sq, agents for Standring, Taylor, and Standring, Rochdale, solicitors for the petitioners. Notices of intention to appear on the hearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm, or his or their solicitor (if any), and must reach the above-named not later than six o'clock on Nov. 8.

MEXICAN AND GENERAL CONCESSION COMPANY LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Nov. 9, before the Court sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand. Venning, Sons, and Mannings, 80, Gresham House, Old Broad-st, solicitors. Notices of intention to appear on the hearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm, or his or their solicitors (if any), and must reach the abovenamed not later than six o'clock on Nov. 8.

MONT DE PIÉTÉ OF ENGLAND LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Nov. 9, before the Court sitting at the High Court of Justice. Strand. Lickorish and Bellord, 11, Queen Victoria-st, solicitors for the petitioners. MACDONALD, SONS, AND COMPANY LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Nov. 9, before the Court sitting at the High Court of Justice, and if at the hearing of the petition it shall appear that a resolution for the voluntary winding-up of the company has been duly passed, and a liquidator appointed, then it is intended to ask in the alternative that the above-named company may be wound-up, subject to the supervision of the Court. Halses, Trustram, and Co., 61, Cheapside, solicitors for the petitioner. Notices of intention to appear on the hearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm, or his or their solicitor (if any), and must reach the above-named not later than six o'clock on Nov. 8. PIDOT'S IRON-SILVER AND FERRO-BRONZE SYNDICATE LIMITED.-Petition for windingup to be heard Nov. 9, before the Court sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand. Cuddon and Co., 9, Fleet-st, solicitors for the petitioner. Notices of intention to appear on the hearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm, or his or their solicitor (if any), and must reach the above-named not later than six o'clock on Nov. 6.

PWLLHELI AND NEVIN MUTUAL MARINE INSURANCE ASSOCIATION LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Nov. 30, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. J. H. Thomas, Tremydon, Nevin, North Wales, the liquidator of the company. SOUTH WALES DOMESTIC SUPPLY ASSOCIATION LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Dec. 13, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. R. G. Cawker, Temple-st, Swansea, one of the liquidators of the company. W. Cox, Adelaide-chmbrs, Swansea, solicitor for the liquidators.

SAMUEL PHILIPS LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Nov. 29, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. T. Smethurst, 26, Mall Pall, Manchester, one of the liquidators of the company. Dec. 7, at eleven o'clock, at the County Courthouse, Manchester, is the time appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon such

claims.

SILVERLEDGE SYNDICATE LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Dec. 14, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any) to Mr. W. P. Owen, 3 to 5, Queen-st, Cheapside, the liquidator of the company.

THALIA PRODUCE AND TOMATO VINEGAR COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Nov. 30, their names and addresses, and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. H. Bird, Botolph House, Eastcheap, the liquidator of the company. T. Lovell, Monument-bldgs, solicitor for the liquidator. TRADERS' DEBTS PURCHASING ASSOCIATION LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard, Nov. 9, before the Court sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand. Steadman, Van Praagh, Sims, and Co., 23, Old Broad-st. solicitors for the petitioner. Notices of intention to appear on the hearing of the petition must be signed by the person or firm, or his or their solicitor (if any), and must reach the above-named not later than six o'clock on Nov. 8. WILLMOTT URN PATENTS COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Dec. 8, their.

names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. S. Gibbs, Ethelburga House, Bishopsgate Within, the liquidator of the company. J. A. Maxwell, 97 and 98, Bishopsgate-st, solicitor for the liquidator.

WILTON SPINNING COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Dec. 1, their names and addresses, and the particulars of their claims to Mr. C. Martin, Bank-st, Bury, Lancashire, the liquidator of the company. J. G. Openshaw, 16, Bolton-st, Bury, solicitor for the liquidator.

WEST ARGENTINE LIMITED.-In liquidation (on reconstruction).-Creditors to send in, by Dec. 14, their names and addresses and the particulars of their claims, and the names and addresses of their solicitors (if any), to Mr. W. P. Owen, 3 to 5, Queenst, Cheapside, the liquidator of the company.

CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY.
LAST DAY OF PROOF.

BASS (Charles), 6, South Albion-st, Leicester, builder. Nov. 30; G. E. Bouskell, solicitor, Queen's-chmbrs, Horsefair-st, Leicester. Dec. 15; Mr. Justice Kekewich, at a quarter-past two o'clock.

BROWN (John), South Hylton, Durham, rivet manufacturer. Nov. 30; Kidson,
McKenzies, and Kidson, solicitors. 66, John-st, Sunderland. Dec. 6; A. O.
Smith, Registrar of the Court of Chancery of the County Palatine of Durham,
19, Elvet-bridge, Durham, at half-past ten o'clock.

BURNEY (James Edward), Ashleigh, Bridstow, Herefordshire, gentleman. Nov. 16;
N. K. Collins, Registrar of the Herefordshire County Court, County Court-office,
Ross. Nov. 21; the Registrar aforesaid, at twelve o'clock.
WILKINSON (Simon), Howgrave, Yorkshire, farmer. Nov. 25; W. Fowle, solicitor,
Northallerton, Yorkshire. Dec. 2; Mr. Justice North, at twelve o'clock.

CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. c. 35.

LAST DAY OF CLAIM AND TO WHOM PARTICULARS TO BE SENT. ARBUTHNOT (Eliza Jane), Bridgen-pl, Bexley, Kent, widow. Dec. 7; Francis and Johnson, solicitors, 26, Austin Friars. ANDERSON (Rose Anne Hall), wife of Charles Anderson, formerly of Hatcham-ter, 215, New Cross-rd, late of 38, Spencer-sq, Ramsgate, Kent. Dec. 22; W. J. and E. H. Tremellen, solicitors, Law Courts-chmbrs, 33, Chancery-la. BELLEW (Henry Walter), the Chalet, Farnham Royal, Buckinghamshire, a surgeongeneral in Her Majesty's Bengal Army, retired C. S. I. Dec. 1; J. Ellerton, solicitor, 3, New-inn, Strand.

BEALL (James), The Cedars, Algernon-rd, Hendon, gentleman. Nov. 25; Keighley, Arnold, and Higgs, solicitors, 37, Lincoln's-inn-fillds.

BACKHOUSE (Eliza), Badsworth, Yorkshire, widow. Dec. 1; Claude, Leatham, and Co., solicitors, Wakefield.

BRIDGER (Mary Ann), Gordon Lodge, Ashburnham-rd. Clive-vale, Hastings, Sussex, widow. Dec. 9; Meadows, Elliott, Meadows, and Thorpe, solicitors, 32, Havelockrd, Hastings. BOLONGARS, and not Bolongers, as erroneously printed in Gazette of 25th ult. (Peter), 147, Bury New-rd, Manchester, Lancashire, gentleman. Dec. 6; Dixon and Linnell, solicitors, 24, Cross-st, Manchester.

BOTHAM (George), Wexham Court, Buckinghamshire, gentleman. Creditors to send in forthwith particulars of their claims to Messrs. Llewellyn and Ackrill, solicitors, Tunstall, Staffordshire.

BRADY (Hannah), Holgate Hill, York, widow. Dec. 6; Hind and Robinson, solicitors, 8, Stone-bldgs, Lincoln's-inn.

BOLTON (Thomas), Yeadon, Yorkshire. Nov. 30; Watson, Son, and Smith, solicitors, 11. Cheapside, Bradford.

BARNARD (Anne Maria), New Inn Tavern, 254, Westminster Bridge-rd, Surrey, widow. Dec 13; Leggatt, Rubenstein, and Co., solicitors, 5, Raymond-bldgs, Gray's-inn.

CUPPA (Jerome James), 40, Norfolk-sq, Brighton, Sussex, merchant. Nov. 20; J. and
C. Robinson and Wilkins, solicitors, 19, King's Arms-yard.
COLVILL (Caroline Sophia Russell), formerly of 2, Overstone-rd, Hammersmith, after-
wards of 3, Clifton-ter, Chiswick, and 87, Goldhawk-rd, late of 128, Shepherd's
Bush-rd, spinster. Dec. 31; Rooke and Sons, solicitors, 45, Lincoln's-inn-flds.
CYSLER (Charles), Magpies public-house, Larkin's-green, Coleshill, near_Amersham,
Hertfordshire, licensed victualler. Dec. 1; G. A. Charsley, solicitor, Beaconsfield,
Bucks.

CORAH (Hannah), The Cedars, Stoneygate, near Leicester, widow. Dec. 10; R. and
G. Toller and Sons, solicitors, 2, Wickliffe-st, Leicester.

DONALD (Sarah), widow of Owen Donald, Nottingham, lace manufacturer, who, at the time of her death, was residing at 9, Regent-st, New Basford, Nottingham. Dec. 17; Watson, Wadsworth, and Ward, solicitors, 15, Weekday-cross, Nottingham.

DAKIN (John), Alsager, Cheshire, gentleman. Dec. 1; F. C. Mayer, solicitor, Burslem, Staffordshire.

DU PRE (Anne), Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, widow. Dec. 3; Winterbothams and Gurney, solicitors, Cheltenham.

ELVY (Thomas), Copley Dene, Ealing, and of Duke-street, Oxford-st, wine merchant. Dec. 8; W. B. Fairbrother, solicitor, 158, Leadenhall-st.

Dec. 1; Meredith,

EDE (Maria Bulkeley), 18, Brunswick-pl, Brighton, spinster.
Roberts, and Mills, solicitors, 8, New-sq, Lincoln's-inn.
EVANS (Anne), 13, Villa-rd, Handsworth, Staffordshire, spinster. Nov. 30; Cottrell
and Son, solicitors, 25, Waterloo-st, Birmingham.

FOSTER (Thomas), Alveston, Warwickshire, gentleman. Dec. 28; Slater and Co., solicitors, Darlaston, Staffordshire.

FREEMAN (Edward), Framsden, Suffolk, farmer. Dec. 1; W. W. Welton, solicitor,
Woodbridge.

GARLAND (Oswald), 4, Eton-rd, Plumstead, Kent.
William-st, Woolwich.

Nov. 21; F. Greenep, solicitor, 44,

Dec. 10; Davenport, Jones, and

GOLDSMITH (Edwin), Icklesham, Sussex, farmer.
Glenister, solicitors, 8 Bank-bldgs, Hastings.
GREENHILL (George Whitlock), formerly of Ashford, Kent, late of St. Leonards,
Sussex. Nov. 22; Prince, Ayres, and Austen, solicitors, 9, Fleet-st.
GRANT (James Augustus), 19, Upper Grosvenor-st, and Househill, Nairn, N.B., late a
lieutenant-colonel in Her Majesty's army in India. Nov. 26; Dunster and Chap-
man, solicitors, 1, Henrietta-st, Cavendish-sq.

GLOVER (Thomas), Holland Moor, Upholland, Lancashire, farmer and labourer.
Nov. 23; Peace and Ellis, solicitors, 18, King-st, Wigan.
GOWENLOCK (Alice), 62A, Upper Moss-la, Hulme, Manchester, Lancashire, widow.
Nov. 30; Southam and Harwood, solicitors, 78. Cross-st, Manchester.
HEPWORTH (Mary Ann), 23, Cambrian-ter, Holbeck Moor, Leeds, Yorkshire, and who
carried on business under the style of the Batley Waste Pulling Co., at Batley
Carr, near Batley, Yorkshire. Nov. 26; Learoyd and Co., solicitors, Huddersfield.
HUGHES (Maria), 60, Stoney Stanton-rd, Coventry, Warwickshire, spinster. Dec. 1;
Hughes and Masser, solicitors, 111, Little Park-st, Coventry.

HERVEY (Cecil Richard), formerly of 12, Lowndes-st, late of Ötahuhu, New Zealand,
gentleman, and his widow, HERVEY (Sophia Elizabeth), commonly called Lady
Alfred Hervey, late of 12, Lowndes-st. Nov. 28; A. F. Cox, solicitor, 14. Hart-st,
Bloomsbury.
Nov. 26;

HIRON (John), 15, Royal-rd, West Cliff, Ramsgate, Kent, gentleman.

Nov. 27;

E. Lloyd, solicitor, 23, Wormwood-st, Old Broad-st. JACKSON (William), Cross Beck, Kirkby Ireleth, Lancashire, farm servant. M. J. A. Dickinson, solicitor, Broughton-in-Furness. KENDREW (John), York, gentleman. Dec. 19; L. and W. Thompson, solicitors, Judges-ct, York. KEELAN (Patrick), Craigmore, Holderness-rd, Kingston-upon-Hull, doctor of medicine. Nov. 14; T. and A. Priestman, solicitors, Temple-bldgs, Hull. KELLER (William), Ranelagh-rd, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, shoe upper closer. Nov. 21; T. J. Morgan, solicitor, Silver-st, Wellingborough. LAING (Thomas), Borough House, and of Redcott's-la, West Borough, Wimborne Minster, Dorsetshire, wine and spirit merchant. Nov. 26; J. Q. Laing, Borough House, Wimborne.

LLOYD (Richard Alfred), formerly of Agra, North West Provinces of India, inspector of schools, sometime of the Midland Grand hotel, and the Great Northern hotel, London, late of 149 and 151, London-rd, St. Leonard's-on-Sea, Sussex. Dec. 14; H. Sowton, solicitor, 9, Bedford-row.

LILLEY (George), Hingham, Norfolk, retired carpenter. Nov. 30; Sadd and Bacon, solicitors, Theatre-st, Norwich.

LEIGH (Basset Edwards), 28, Augustus-st, Brook's Bar, Stretford, Lancashire, corporation clerk. Dec. 10; A. Grundy, Son, and Co., solicitors, 78, King-st, Man

chester.

MORTON (John Davis), 13, Lansdowne-rd, Tunbridge Wells, Kent, gentleman. Dec. 10;
W. H. Herbert, 10, Cork-st, Burlington-grdns.

MARTIN (Robert), 14, Mercer-st, Clayton-le-Moors, near Accrington, Lancashire,
carrier. Nov. 30; R. Sharples, solicitor, 10, Church-st, Accrington.
MACNAUGHTAN (William), Dunderawe, King's-rd, Clapham Park, Surrey, gentleman
Dec. 1: Linklater and Co., solicitors, 2, Bond-ct, Walbrook.
MURSELL (Christoper John), Castle inn, Newport, Isle of Wight. Dec. 7; W. T. Way
Buckell, solicitor, Newport, Isle of Wight.
MEYER (Sarah), 14, Holland-pk, widow.

solicitors, 54, Gresham-st.

Dec. 8; Phelps, Margetson, and Co.,

NORDERLING (Louisa Hay), Folkestone, Kent, widow. Nov. 20; J. and C. Robinson and Wilkins, solicitors, 19, King's Arms-yard.

NICKLIN (Mary), 66, Cauldon-rd, Shelton, Staffordshire, widow. Nov. 30; Keary, Marshall, and Ashwell, solicitors, Stoke-upon-Trent.

PETERS (James Carter), Back House, Anstwick, Yorkshire, gentleman. Dec. 12; J. H.
Peters, solicitor, 62, King-st, Manchester.

POOLE (Mary), Weston-super-Mare, Somersetshire, spinster.
Sons, solicitors, Weston-super-Mare.

Dec. 1; W. Smith and

PICKARD (John), Follifoot, Yorkshire, farmer. Nov. 15; A. W. Gilling, solicitor. Harrogate.

PARKER (Lucy Ann), Lairgate, Beverley, East Yorkshire, and 47, Wellington-la, Kingston-upon-Hull, spinster. Dec. 1; T. and A. Priestman, solicitors, Templebldgs, Hull.

PAYNE (Edmund), Laurel Cottage, Copthorne, Surrey, retired superintendent of police. Dec. 1; Thomson and Nightingale, solicitors, Reigate, Surrey.

RIDLEY (John), 8, Challoner-ter West. South Shields, Durham, retired bank manager. Dec. 10; Leitch, Dodd, Bramwell, and Bell, solicitors, 54, Saville-st, Northr Shields.

RHODES (George), formerly of Charnock Hall, Eckington, Derbyshire, late of 29,
Holland-rd, Highfleld, Sheffield, Yorkshire, gentleman. Dec. 31; B. Wake and
Co., solicitors, Castle-ct. Sheffield.

ROBINSON (James), 611, Oldham-rd, Newton Heath, Lancashire, gentleman. Dec. 24,
Clay and Son, solicitors, 8, St. James's-sq, Manchester.
RAPER (Hannah), 23, Russell-street, Middlesbrough, Yorkshire, widow.
Dec. 1;
J. Scott, solicitors, 98, Albion-st, Leeds.
ROSSER (Charles Oliver), Vimpany's-common, Henbury, Gloucestershire, wheelwright.
Dec. 1; Sinnott and Spofforth, solicitors, 12, Broad-st, Bristol.
REID (Joseph), 11, Wellington-mansions, North Bank, Park-rd, Regent's Park, M.D.
Dec. 12; Bowlings, Foyer. and Hordern, solicitors, 26, Essex-st, Strand.
SPRAY (Thomas), Pelham-rd, Sherwood Rise, Nottingham, and of Walnut Tree-la,
Nottingham, silk dyer. Dec. 17; Watson, Wadsworth, and Ward, solicitors. 15,
Weekday-cross, Nottingham.

SMART (Anne), Ware-rd, Hertford, spinster. Nov. 30; Spence, Hawks, and Phillips, solicitors, Hertford.

SANDERS (John), Prospect House, Wallaston, Northamptonshire, gentleman. Dec. 17; W. J. Henry, solicitor, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.

SYDDALL (Jane Berry), 58, Leyland-rd, Southport, Lancashire, widow. Nov. 21 J. S. Hopwood, solicltor, 17, King-st, Wigan.

SCOTT (Isabella), Carlton Lodge, Brondesbury-rd, Kilburn, widow. Nov. 30; Nash, Field, and Co., solicitors, 12, Queen-st, Cheapside.

SMITH (William), 10, Caughey-st, Kingston-upon-Hull, gentleman. Jan. 30, 1893; Middlemiss and Pearce, solicitors, 11, Parliament-st, Kingston-upon-Hull.

Nov. 30;

THOMAS (Emma), Sowerby-st, Sowerby Bridge, Halifax, Yorkshire, widow.
Barstow and Midgley, solicitors, 8, Harrison-rd, Halifax.
TERRY (William), 12, Trinity-crescent, Folkestone, Kent, lodging-house keeper.
Dec. 10; F. Hall, solicitor, Bank-chmbrs, Folkestone.
TAYLOR (James), 26, James-st, Plymouth, Devonshire, a retired captain in the
merchant service. Dec. 1; A. Weekes, solicitor, 11, Frankfort-st, Plymouth.
TARNER (Henry Tilbury), St. John's Lodge, Tilbury-pl, Brighton, Sussex, gentleman.
Nov. 26; Dunster and Chapman, solicitors, 1, Henrietta-st, Cavendish-sq.
WHYBROW (Henry), 4, St. Leonard's-ter, Mornington-rd, Bow, and of 2, Egremont-
villas, the Hamlet, Southend, Essex, gentleman. Dec. 1; Thomsons, Brooks, and
Danby, solicitors, 63, Cornhill.

WILLIAMS (Samuel), Llanaravon Farm, Llantornam, Monmouthshire, farmer.
Nov. 30 Watkins and Co., solicitors, Pontypool.

WILDAY (William John), Great Bridge, Tipton, Staffordshire, formerly a timber merchant. Dec. 1; W. Bache, solicitor, Churchill House, West Bromwich. WARDER (Catherine), 2, Lansdowne-ter, Exeter, widow. Nov. 21; W. Buckingham and Son, solicitors, 12, Southernhay, Exeter.

WILSON (William), Tiger Tea Warehouse, Stramongate, Kendal, Westmoreland,
family grocer. Dec. 20; C. G. Thomson and Wilson, solicitors, Kendal.
WATERFALL (Edward Joshua), Sheffield, Yorkshire, mercantile clerk.
Webster and Styring, solicitors, 3, Hartshead, Sheffield.

Nov. 30;

WOODBRIDGE (Thomas), Bucklebury, Berkshire, farmer. Dec. 1; A. C. Bazett, solicitor, Newbury, Berks.

COMMERCIAL FAILURES AND BILLS OF SALE.-According to Stubbs' Weekly Gazette, the number of failures in England and Wales gazetted during the week ending the 29th Oct. was 162. The number in the corresponding week of last year was 166, showing a decrease of 4. The number of bills of sale in England and Wales, registered at the Queen's Bench for the week ending the 29th Oct. was 195. The number in the corresponding week of last year was 181, and the corresponding weeks for the three previous years 149, 178, and 218.

LAW SOCIETIES.

HUDDERSFIELD INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY. THE annual meeting of the above society was held on the 28th Oct. at the society's rooms. Mr. R. P. Berry, the president, occupied the chair, and there were also present Mr. Joseph Bottomley, Mr. C. E. Freeman, Mr. G. B. Nalder (treasurer), Mr. J. W. Piercy and Mr. E. T. Woodhead (hon. sec.), Mr. H. Barber (town clerk), Mr. A. H. J. Fletcher, Mr. G. G. Fisher, Mr. A. Swift, Mr. J. J. Booth, Mr. W. L. Wilmshurst, Mr. Joseph Walker, and others.

Mr. Piercy read a letter from Mr. C. Mills, saying he could not attend because he had to be at a meeting of the council of the Huddersfield Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Piercy likewise read a letter from Mr. T. L. Chadwick, resigning his membership because he was giving up private practice on being appointed registrar of Dewsbury County Court.

Mr. J. W. Piercy, one of the hon. secretaries, presented the eleventh annual report, which stated that during the year four members of the society had died, namely, Mr. L. R. Bibby, Mr. J. Craven, Mr. W. Armitage, and Mr. M. Kidd, and four new members had been elected, making the number now fifty-five. The report detailed the steps which were taken by the committee with regard to the Huddersfield Official Receivership, and stated that representations were made to Sir Michael HicksBeach (the then president of the Board of Trade) and to Mr. Summers, M.P., and the matter was satisfactorily set at rest by the appointment of Mr. R. Welsh, a local solicitor and a member of the society. The committee considered the provisions of the Public Trustee Bill, and were represented by the ex-president (Mr. C. E. Freeman) and Mr. Fletcher, at a special meeting of the council of the Incorporated Law Society, and of delegates from the provincial law societies, held in London on the 19th Feb. last, at which meeting a resolution was carried, by a large majority, that it was not desirable for the Incorporated Law Society to prepare a Bill, or in any way to acquiesce in the appointment of a public trustee. The Incorporated Law Society having asked for the opinion of this society on the circuit system, the subject was carefully considered, and a series of recommendations were forwarded to the London society, the more important suggestions being that the number of assize towns should be materially reduced, and a principle of centralisation of assize work adopted, and that the assizes should be so arranged as to allow of continuous sittings in London. Another matter of some importance which had engaged the attention of the committee was the condition of the inclosure awards relating to lands in the West Riding. A conference of delegates from the

various Yorkshire law societies was held at Wakefield, at which this society was represented by the president, and the committee subsequently concurred with these law societies in a petition to the West Riding County Council, wherein it was pointed out that these awards were in many cases in the possession of the various rectors or vicars of the parishes to which they related; that many were registered in the Registry of Deeds at Wakefield, and others at the office of the clerk of the peace, but some were not registered at either place; that much expense and inconvenience was occasioned by having to make journeys from different parts of the Riding either to Wakefield or the parish where the award might happen to be, that it would be a great benefit to local authorities, the Legal Profession, and the public generally if the whole of the awards with the plans relating thereto could be printed and published, and the county council was requested to take the necessary steps to have the awards printed and published. The county council had expressed their willingness to receive a deputation on the subject, and the committee had arranged to be represented, but no date for the conference had yet been fixed. The committee had done useful work in considering various other matters affecting the interests of the Profession, as for example the condition of business in the local County Court, the accommodation provided for solicitors attending the Leeds Assizes, and the law lectures and classes proposed to be established at the Yorkshire College. The receipts for the current year, comprising subscriptions, arrears, entrance fees, &c., had amounted to the sum of £119 15s. 6d., and the expenditure for the same period had been £89 7s. 6d., leaving a balance to be transferred to the credit of capital account of £30 8s., reducing the liability to such account from £96 8s. 6d. to £66 0s. 6d. It would thus be seen that the amount owing to capital account was being regularly and gradually reduced, and in about two years should be entirely liquidated. The proposed reduction of subscriptions in the cases of members of firms would probably entail a reduction of about £12 12s. in the future annual income. The credit balance of the income of the Alfred Sykes prize fund had increased from £11 12s. 11d. to £16 19s., there not having been any medal presented during the current

year.

Mr. Nalder read the financial statement, which gave the foregoing amongst other particulars, and stated that two donations, amounting to £4 4s., had been received from Judge Cadman.

On the motion of the President, seconded by Mr. Fisher, the report and financial statement were adopted.

The President, in delivering an address on current topics interesting to the Legal Profession, attributed the laws delays in the main to the Long Vacation. The joint committee of the Bar and the Incorporated Law Society of the United Kingdom had met and proposed the establishment of a tribunal of commerce with a judge presiding to try commercial cases in London and Middlesex, apart from all other work. He suggested that should be carried further, and extended to large provincial commercial centres, and that if necessary the judges should be assisted by practical assessors. Each industry, in regard to its manufactures, had a separate language of its own, and there ought to be a competent court sitting uninterruptedly in each centre to hear purely commercial cases, so that each judge might become familiar with the language of the neighbourhood, and with the objects and uses of the processes and materials used in his district. Then they would hear no more of the surprising observations of judges as to the meaning of terms which everybody but them understood perfectly well. The language of various industries had a great variety of meaning, and that was of vital importance. He expressed the opinion that over-speculation was the cause of the depression in the trade of the country, and that the extreme lengths of the terms of credit was the cause of much of the depression in this particular district.

Mr. Berry was re-elected president, his Honour Judge Cadman was appointed a governor, Mr. G. B. Nalder was re-elected treasurer, Messrs. Piercy and Woodhead were re-elected hon. secs., Mr. Joseph Bottomley was recommended as chairman of committees, Messrs. Booth, Fletcher, Owen, Wm. Ramsden, T. D. Ruddock, J. H. Sykes, A. Swift, J. H. Turner, H. White, and W. L. Wilmshurst were chosen on the committee.

Mr. Fletcher proposed that the annual subscription be £2 2s. for each member, excepting in the case of a firm of more than oue member, when it shall be £1 1s. each, and £1 1s. for members who have been admitted less than six years.

Mr. Booth seconded the resolution, which was carried, and the meeting ended.

INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY OF PLYMOUTH. THE seventy-seventh annual general meeting of the society, and the twenty-first since its incorporation in 1871, was held on Friday, the 27th ult., in Athenæum Chambers. The society is an old one, having been founded in 1815, and at the present time it appears to be in a very prosperous condition. Mr. Shelley retired from the office of president, which he has held for two years, and received a very hearty vote of thanks for his services, especially in connection with last year's visit of the Incorporated Law Society of the United Kingdom. Mr. J. J. E. Venning was elected president for the coming year; Mr. H. P. Prance, vice-president; and the treasurer and secretaries (Messrs. E. A. Bennett, R. B. Johns, and J. Y. Woolcombe) were re-elected with a strong committee. The report shows that the past year has been one of progress, though it foreshadows plenty of work for the future. A remodelling of the constitution of the society has been effected. New regulations for the library have been brought into force, and with numerous additions of books have greatly increased its efficiency, and we note that a catalogue is in preparation. Perhaps one of the most practically useful things done has been the adoption of copyrighted editions of sale calculated to be applicable with the aid of special conditions adapted to the needs of each particular case in all

auctions. This is a plan adopted by all the large provincial law societies, and is much to be commended for the sake of the public as well as the Profession.

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.

STATUTE LAW REVISION.-It would be a matter of interest to know how and on what principles the revision of the statutes is carried out. From one case which has come under my notice it appears that those who draft the schedules to some acts proceed by the "scissors and paste method. The Short Titles Act 1892 (20th May) deals with the short titles of various Acts, including the Metropolitan Police Acts, and by implication corrects a blunder in a previous Act by which two distinct Acts had been given the same title. The Statute Law Revision Act 1892 (20th June) next steps in, restoring instead of correcting the previous blunders, so that the original confusion is made worse than before. To consider the statutes in question in their chronological order: The statute, 24 & 25 Vict. c. 51, dealing with the Dockyard Police, had originally no short title. In the same session the Metropolitan Police Receiver's Act 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 124) was passed, and derives its short title from its last section (sect. 10). The confusion between these two statutes began by the latter Act being given a new title, viz., the Metropolitan Police Act 1861, by sect. 1 of the Metropolitan Police Act 1884, the draughtsman of which was apparently entirely ignorant of the Acts of 1860, 1861, and 1867, relating to the Dockyard Police and receiver, as those Acts are omitted from the schedule enumerating the Metropolitan Police Acts. Two years later the Metropolitan Police Act 1886 supplied the above-mentioned omissions, and also gave to the Dockyard Act (24 & 25 Vict. c. 51) the title: The Metropolitan Police Act 1861, one which had already been given to the Metropolitan Police Receiver's Act 1861. These errors were pointed out on pages 79 and 80 of the Metropolitan Police Guide, but so far as the draughtsmen of the Acts of 1892 are concerned that work might never have been written. The draughtsman of the Short Titles Act 1892 avoided the above-mentioned blunders, but fell into another of the same nature. By this Act the statute (24 & 25 Vict. c. 51) has given to it the only short title it ever had, viz., the Metropolitan Police Act 1861, given to it originally by the Metropolitan Police Act of 1886, and the second Act (24 & 25 Vict. c. 124) is referred to in schedule 2 amongst the collective titles by its original title, the Metropolitan Police Receiver's Act 1861. But the Metropolitan Streets Act 1867 is omitted; this Act (30 & 31 Vict. c. 134), which applies to the Metropolitan Police District and City of London, by sect. 28 thereof is to be construed as one of the Metropolitan Police Acts, and is therefore on the same footing in this respect as the Police Act 1890, which is included under the collective title, the Metropolitan Police Acts 1829 to 1890, and which applies to the Metropolitan Police District, City of London, and England and Wales. The Short Titles Act 1892 therefore rectified by implication the original blunders, but one month later the Statute Law Revision Act was passed, and expressly repealed sect. 10 of 24 & 25 Vict. c. 124, which is the only enactment giving that Act its true and short title, viz., the Metropolitan Police Receiver's Act 1861, and refers to it as the Metropolitan Police Act 1861, thus restoring the original blunders and confusion. Had the draughtsman simply referred to the index to the statutes, not to speak of the Metropolitan Police Guide, or the Short Titles Act 1892, such a blunder could hardly have been perpetrated. Competent critics would deal severely with the author of any legal text-book containing such loose work. Is it too much to expect ordinary care from the compilers of Acts of Parliament ? JAMES ROBERTS.

New Court, Temple 26th Oct.

SOLICITORS' TAX.-As the time is now approaching for solicitors to renew their certificates cannot something be done to abolish this tax, or at least, to modify it for the less fortunate members of the Profession. I am a young solicitor striving to work up a practice, but I find it takes a long time to make a small profit after paying office expenses, and last, but by no means least, this iniquitous tax. What I complain of is this. Members of the Profession who are making their hundreds a year have only to pay the same amount as we, the less fortunate ones. It is a tax which comes heavy on some, and is not even felt by others. I would suggest that if this tax is to continue it should be based on a graduated scale or worked on the same principle as income tax now is.

ABOLITION OR MODIFICATION.

STATUTE LAW REVISION (IRELAND), 13 & 14 Vict. c. 72.—“ O. V.” asked some time ago why this statute had not been repealed in the Statute Law Revision Act of 1892, inasmuch as it has never been put into operation. It is questionable whether the repeal of an Act which might possibly be put into operation would be within the scope of a Statute Law Revision Bill, but the matter has not been lost sight of, for the Registration of Assurances (Ireland) Bill, introduced by the ex-Attorney-General for Ireland (now Mr. Justice Madden) in the year 1890, and again in the years 1891 and 1892, but which, from want of time, failed to become law last session, proposes to select 13 & 14 Vict. c. 72. Under the circumstances it ought not to appear in the Second Revised Edition. But the volume containing the Acts of 13 & 14 Victoria will not be published for some time, and meanwhile it is to be hoped that the Registration of Assurances (Ireland) Bill will be reintroduced next session, and become law in due course, and the Act in question expressly repealed. W.L.

(Q. 50.) ARCHITECT.-Your correspondents will find that my reply is supported by Mr. Emden in his "Law of Building Leases and Building Contracts," chap. 8 (p. 74 in the edition of 1882). Your printer unfortunately turned R.I.B.A., which I wrote, into R.T.B. I was, of course, referring to the schedule sanctioned by the Royal Institute of British Architects, and confirmed at a general conference of architects in the United Kingdom 1872. It is set out in extenso among the Precedents in Mr. Emden's book. C. V. B.

INNER TEMPLE.-Charles Anthony Benn, George Russell Blackwood, John Neptune Blood, Benjamin Lennard Cherry, Harold Ennis Gardner, Rollo Frederick Graham-Campbell, Arnold Inman, Henry Bradshaw Isherwood, William Hugh Knight, Arthur Palmer Lilley, Dugald Gordon M'Dougall, Fearnley Wells Owen, William Robert Wellesley Peel, Charles Edward Mackintosh Russell, Peter Stubs, and Henry Theodore Van Laun.

MIDDLE TEMPLE.-Gustave Colin Chastellier, Sidney Wrangel Clarke, Robert Rennie Pepys Cockerell, Leonard Cooper, Francis Henry CrippsDay, Keshav Ganesh Deshpande, Alfred Woodroofe Fletcher, Walter Bernard Hamilton, John Anthony Hawke, William Haynes-Smith, Reginald Gerard Francis Jacobs, Samuel James, Michael John Jordan, George Aydon Kelly, Hormus Lascari, Aaron Ernest Lyons, Alick Henry Herbert Maclean, Alexander Neilson, John Moreton Prichard, Florance Thomas Stephen Rippingall, Gurdas Ram Sawhny, Conrad Johnson Simmons, and Satchida Nanda Sinha.

GRAY'S INN.-John Hammond Codrington-Hobkirk and William HughJones.

Examined, 62; passed, 41.

The following students passed a satisfactory examination in Roman Law:

LINCOLN'S-INN.-Henry John Allen, Frank Herbert Coller, George Henry Foley, William Guy Granet, Mohamed Abdul Kabir, William Joseph Pollard, Eaulat Ram Mulchand Seth, John James Gregson Slater, and Alfred John Barton Tapling.

INNER TEMPLE.-Cautley Holmes Cautley, William Cope, Francis Ion Cowlishaw, Horatio Gordon Davies, William Francis Drew, Adshrad Elliott, Leonard Benjamin Franklin, Francis Cadell Garrick, Frederick William Grantham, Khaja Tagin Jan, Oswald Carnegy Johnson, Alfred Moritz Mond, Robert Mortimer Montgomery, Charles Henry Mortimer, Robert Emilius Noble, Daniel Moung Po Dan, George Herbert Pollard, Henry Frank Previté, Samuel Vilett Rolleston, Reginald James Blair Ross, Syed Ahmed Shere, Rowland William Snelling, and Robert Sidney Stone.

MIDDLE TEMPLE.-Nawab Syed Mohi Uddin Ali Khan, William John Archer, Henry James Barker, Louis Arthur Raoul Bax, James Binney, George Hallam Croney, Tulsibhai Jeshangbai Desai, Percival Cecil Richard Dillon, Norman Bruce Elliot, Syed Nasimul Huck, Manley Anderton Latham, Isaac Marshall, Kotaro Mochiguki, Francis William Moore, William North, Charles Louis Henry Pilot, Eugene Renaud, Mowbray Rorke, Howard Spensley, Frank Litherland Teed, Iradut Ullah, William Augustine Hibbert Ware, and Yakubali Jamadon Yusufali.