Page images
[ocr errors]

Summer Cireunite of the Judges --Barristers Calted. Correspondence." 143 Saturday, July 22, Lincoln and City. Edward George Augustus Harcourt Moores Wednesday, July 26, Derby.

Esq., B.A. Monday, July 31, Coventry.

Alfred Bailey, Esq., M.A.
Tuesday, Aug. 1, Warwick.

William Alexander Dobie, Esq., B.A.
Andrew Charles Elliott, Esq.

Edward Fry, Esq., B.A., S.C.L.

Robert Jobn Biron, Esq., B.A., S.C.L.
Alderson, B., and Crompton, J.

Joseph Gillespie O'Dwyer, Esq.
Monday, July 10, Abingdon.

Spencer Perceval, jun., Esq., B.A.
Wednesday, July 12, Oxford and City. Richard Vigors Doyne, Esq., M.A.
Saturday, July 15, Worcester and City. William H. Perfect, Esq., L.L.B.
Wednesday, July 19, Gloucester and City.
Tuesday, July 25, Monmouth.
Thursday, July 27, Hereford.

Saturday, July 29, Shrewsbury.

A. Boyd Purcell, Esq., B.A.
Wednesday, Aug. 2, Stafford.

Henry Rowcliffe, Esq., M. A.
Benjamin Bousfield Swan, Esq., B.A.

John Fell, Esq.

John Walker, Esq.
Coleridge and Wightman, JJ.

Charles Godfrey Price, Esq., M.A.
Tuesday, July 11, Winchester.

Alexander Henry Ross, Esq., B.A. Saturday, July 15, Dorchester.

Robert James Baker, Esq., B.A. Wednesday, July 19, Exeter and City. William Mayo, jun., Esq. Wednesday, July 26, Bodmin.

Hon. Thomas Charles Bruce, M.A. Monday, July 31, Wells.

Edward Waldron Haywood, Esq., S.C.L. Saturday, Aug. 5, Devizes.

Thomas Oliver, Esq. Wednesday, Aug. 9, Bristol.

Thomas Baker, Esq.

William Francis Kemp, Esq., M.A.

George Crampton Leech, Esq., B.A.

June 13.
Platt, B., and Crowder, J.
Wednesday, July 12, York and City.

George Hunter Cary, Esq.
Saturday, July 22, Durham.
Tuesday, July 27, Newcastle and Town.

Monday, July 31, Carlisle.
Thursday, Aug. 3, Appleby.

William Brownrigg Elliot, Esq.
Saturday, Aug. 5, Lancaster.

Henry Cary Dangar, Esq., B.A.
Wednesday, Aug. 9, Liverpool.

William Henry Griffiths, Esq., B.A.
Henry Arkley Eglinton, Esq.
Charles Leeming, Esq.

John Francis Kellett Dillon, Esq., B.A.
Williams, J.

James Henry James, Esq.
Tuesday, July 11, Cardigan.

James Charles Mander, Esq.
Friday, July 14, Haverfordwest and Town.
Tuesday, July 18, Carmarthen.

GRAY'S INX.--June 9.
Saturday, July 22, Cardiff.

Kenneth Leith Sutherland, Esq.
Saturday, July 29, Brecon.

John Holker, Esq.
Wednesday, Aug. 2, Presteign.
Saturday, Aug. 5, Chester and City.

June 14.
Charles Wray Lewis, Esq.




Martin, B.

SELECTIONS FROM CORREWednesday, July 19, Newtown.

Saturday, July 22, Dolgelly.
Tuesday, July 25, Carnarvon.
Friday, July 28, Beaumaris.
Monday, July 31, Ruthin.

A. engages to marry the illegitimate daughter Thursday, Aug. 3, Mold.

of B., on condition that in the settlement, to be Saturday, Aug. 5, Chester and City. made before their marriage, there should be

contained a covenant on the part of the reputed

father, tenant in tail in possession of real estate, BARRISTERS CALLED.

to bar the entail and re-settle it to his own use

during his life, with remainder to his daughter Trinity Term, 1854.

in fee. Deeds are prepared and engrossed in LINCOLN'S INN.-June 9. accordance with this stipulation, and ready for Jonathan George Norton Darby, Esq., B.A. signature, when the father suddenly died havWilliam Wykes Ladell, Esq.

ing only executed the marriage settlement. A.



Correspondence. London Commissioners.- Professional Lists. refuses in consequence to perform his engage- Bonner, Jolin George, 15, London Street, ment. Can the daughter, agreeably to the Fenchurch Street. legal maxim “ Lex neminem cogit ad impos- Boodle, John, 16, Upper Montague Street. sibilia,” the act of God having prevented the Broughton, Francis, 4, Falcon Square. performance of the condition, bring an action Casley, John, 31, Guildford Street, Russell against A. successfully to recover damages for Square. breach of promise ?

IGNOTUS. Cole, Charles Nicholas, 4, Adelphi Terrace.

Cuff, Christopher, 82, St. Martin's Lane.

Horn, Richard, 78, King William Street, ACKOWLEDGMENTS OF DEEDS BY MARRIED City.

Hill, Henry, 1, Bury Court, St. Mary Axe. It is commonly said, emphatically, that,

Holt, Charles, 93, Guildford Street, Russell since the 3 & 4 Wm. 4, c. 74, and as the re

Square. sult of the clauses therein relating to married

Lindo, Nethaneel, 17, King's Arms Yard, women, every deed (with the one exception of

Linklater, James Harvie, 17, Sise Lane. that of protector) must be acknowledged by

Lilley, Joseph, High Road, Peckham, and the wife. Quære is this so in the case of a

41, Blackman Street, Southwark. lease made in conformity with the Statute 32

Mackeson, Edward, 59, Linc. Inn Fields. Hen. 8, c. 27 ? Does not section 78 of the

Peachey, James, 17, Salisbury Square. former Act reserve to the wife her power of

Pulley, Chas. Horton, 28, Great Winchester concurring in such lease by sealing same,

Street. without more?

Rackham, Willoughby Breare Still, 46, I fear it arises from a degree of confusion in Lincoln's Inn Fields. my own mind, but I cannot clearly gather the

Sismey, Thomas, 11, Serjeants' Inn. exact import of the concluding clause of sect.

Towse, John Beckwith, 24, Laurence Pount3 (32 Hen. 8), taken in connexion with the re- ney Lane. servation of rent to husband and wife required

Walls, William Albert, 6, Bloomsbury by the former part of this section. I have Square. looked into Tomlin's Law Dictionary, Bacon's

Wedlake, Henry Brayley, 10, King's Bench Abridgment, Newman's Conveyancing, and Walk. Woodfall's Landlord and Tenant, but cannot

Wingate, Geo. Theodore, 9, Copthall Court satisfy myself, on authority, as to the mode of taking a surrender of such a lease, whether it may be done at all, and if so, whether to wife PROFESSIONAL LISTS. or husband and wife? I should feel obliged if some of your readers would enlighten me by




From 23rd May to 16th June, 1854, both inCOUNTY COURT. —“MY AUNT'S case."

clusive, with dates when gazetted. SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE.”

Barret, Edward, and Joseph Morton Barret, A defendant having alleged his inability to Otley and Leeds, Attorneys and Solicitors.

June 9. pay the plaintiff's demand the plaintiff admitted it, but maintained that though the defend.

Caddick, Elisha, and Charles Henry Bayley, ant himself could not pay, he had an aunt who West Bromwich, Attorneys, Solicitors, and could; and the Judge being of this opinion,

Conveyancers. June 6. made an order against the aunt. This is said

De Lara, Michael Cohen, and William Fogg, to be a leading County Court authority, and is Manchester, Attorneys and Solicitors, May

26. commonly cited as My Aunt's Case.”Crosgate's case (8 Rep. 66), a Dialogue in

Jenkyn, James and Osborn Augustus Jenye Shades on Special Pleading Reform, p. v., kyn, John Street and Buckingham Street

, printed by Búlt, 25, New Quebec Street, Adelphi, and 3, Sherborne Lane, City, SoliciPortman Square. 1854. For private circulation tors, Attorneys, and Conveyancers. June 9. only.


Lothian, Maurice, and James Finlay, Edinburgh, Solicitors. June 2.

Newsam, Thomas, and Arthur Griffin, MidLIST OF LONDON COMMISSIONERS dlesborough, Attorneys and Solicitors. May


Truwhitt, Charles, and Henry Morton Ody, OATHS IN CHANCERY. 51, Lincoln's Inn Fields, Attorneys and So.

licitors. May 26. Appleby, Saml, 6, Harpur Street, Red Lion Watson, James Otley, and George Webster, Square.

Liverpool, Attorneys and Solicitors. June 6. Allen, Chas. Pettitt, 17, Carlisle Street, Soho

Wilding, Richard, and John Fisher, BlackSquare.

burn, Attorneys and Solicitors. June 6. Blake, Charles, 22, College Hill.

Wordsworth, Henry, and Thomas Dunn Burton, Edwd. Frederick, 7, Chancery Lane. 32, Threadneedle Street, and the South Set

...b way

Professional Lists.-Notes of the Week.-Superior Courts : Court of Chancery. 147 House, Threadneedle Street, Attorneys, So- Winterbotham, John Brend, jun., Cheltenlicitors, and Conveyancers. June 9.

ham. June 16.

[ocr errors][merged small]



Appointed under the Fines and Recoveries' Act,

with dates when gazetted. Appointed under the 16 & 17 Vict. c. 78, with dates when gazetted.

Plaskitt, William, Gainsborough, in and for

the parts of Lindsey, in the county of Lincoln. Burt, William Curtis, Reigate. May 30. June 13. Chamberlain, Ayling, Portsea. May 26. Welchman, Robert Frederick, Southam, in Fox, Frederic, Norwich. June 6.

and for the county of Warwick. May 23.
Franklin, James, Halifax.' May 26.
Gwyer, George Wright, Bristol. June 16.

Heathcote, Edward, Hatfield. May 26.
Hollier, Henry John, Aberdare. June 6.
Jessop, Richard, Holmfirth. May 30.

NEW MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT. Kitson, Henry, Wolverhampton. May 30. Abel Smith, jun., for the County of Hertford, Knowles, Isaac, Wellington, Salop. June 9. in the room of Thomas Plumer Halsey, Esq., Shapland, William, Devonport. May 30. deceased.



Court of Chancery.

annuity to such issue of the body of Mr (Coram Lord Chancellor and Lords Justices.) Mealy according to the will.

Mr. Mealy In re Winch's Trusts. March 18, 29; April 1808 his widow married Mr. Naylor, and died

died in 1805 without leaving any issue, and in 21; June 14, 1854.

in 1851, having survived Mr. Naylor, and WILL. - CONSTRUCTION. — ANNUITY.

leaving two children issue of such marriage,

and also grandchildren. It further appeared The testator, by his will, gave to Mrs. M. an that by a deed dated in March, 1812, Mrs.

annuity of 600l. sterling, to commence six Naylor had for the considerations therein months after his decease, for her life and mentioned (which included a compromise of the issue from her body lawfully begotten; the matters in dispute between her and the on failure of which to revert to his heirs ; executors, and that she should have an annuity and he requested two friends to act as of 6001, for her life, and her husband if he trustees, so that the annuity might be should survive, 3001. for his life) assigned all secured to Mrs. M.'s sole use and benefit, her interest under the testator's will to Mr. and be paid to her quarterly or half- George Winch, the surviving executor, and yearly, as they might deem proper : Held, that à bill to set aside this deed had been dison appeal from Vice-Chancellor Stuart, missed—the decision on appeal being affirmed. that the word issue" was a word of pur- The fund was paid into Court under the 10 & chase, and not of limitation, and that the 11 Vict. c. 96, and Mr. George Winch's rechildren and grandchildren living at Mrs. presentative now presented a petition for a M.'s death were entitled to the annuity transfer of the stock under the deed of March, during their lires, but not to the annuity 1812. The Vice-Chancellor Stuart held, that fund.

the annuity was in the nature of personalty, The testator, John Winch, hy his will, and that the word “issue” was a word of purdated in March, 1796, gave and bequeathed to chase, and that Mrs. Naylor took an equitable Mrs. Anna M. Mealy an annuity of 6001. ster- interest for life only to her separate use, with ling, to commence six inonths after his decease, a gift of the legal estate to her trustees during for her life, and the issue from her body law- her life, and that on her death her children fully begotten; on failure of which to revert to were entitled as a class in equal shares as joint his heirs ; and he requested his friends Mr. tenants. Kindersley and Mr. Cockburn to act as trus

Solicitor-General, Lee, and Archibald Smith tees, so that the annuity might be secured for in support ; Rolt and G. M. Giffard for Mrs. Mrs. Mealy's sole use and benefit

, and be paid Naylor's children ; C. P. Stewart for her grandto ber quarterly or half-yearly, as they might children ; Malins and C. Forster for the exedeem proper. On the testator's death in June cutors; W. Hislop Clarke for the trustees. 1797, his executors, Messrs. George and James

Cur. ad. vult. Winch, by indenture dated in May, 1798, as- The Court said, that in accordance with the signed part the assets upon trust to pay the decision of Lord Chancellor Thurlow in Knight use and benefit during her natural life, and be considered as personalty, and the interest from and after her decease then to transfer the therein of Mrs. Naylor limited to her life. fund to Messrs. George and, James Winch, Such being the case, and the word “issue" their heirs, executors, or administrators, who being treated as a word of purchase and not thereby declared they would thereupon pay the of limitation, the children and grandchildren



148 Superior Courts : Court of Chancery.-V. C. Kindersley.- Queen's Bench. living at the death of Mrs. Naylor were en- a settlement does not attach in respect of titled to the annuity during their lives, and not a reversionary interest to which she is ento the annuity fund, and the order of the Court titled under a will, although her husband below would be varied in that respect.

has been bankrupt, and an injunction was

refused to restrain him from dealing with (Coram Lord Chancellor and Lords Justices.)

the same. Parker v. Sowerby. June 14, 1854.

This was a claim on behalf of a married

woman to obtain the settlement of a reversionWILL.- CONSTRUCTION.-DISCHARGE OF WIFE'S DOWER.

ary interest in certain stock to which she was

entitled under the will of a Mr. George Slack, Where a testator, by his will, empowered his in the event of his daughter dying without

trustees to cut timber on, grant leases of, issue. It appeared that her husband had been and to sell certain estates, held, dismissing twice bankrupt.

An injunction was asked for an appeal from Vice-Chancellor Kindersley, in the alternative to restrain the husband from that such estates were discharged from his dealing with the reversion. wife's dower.

A. J. Lewis, in support, referred to Ellis v. This was an appeal from the decision of Vice- Ellis, 1 Vin. Ábr. 475. Chancellor Kindersley (reported i Drewry,488). Amphlett for the assignees, contrà. The testator, by his will, dated in August, 1833, The Vice-Chancellor said, that although the after appointing his wife sole executrix, be- inclination of the Court was to assist and proqueathed to her all his personal property, to tect the wife, yet in accordance with the deher own use, and he directed her out of the cision of Osborn v. Morgan, 9 Hare, 432, 4 rents or arrears of rent due at his death to pay !(cited by Darling, amicus curiæ), the declaration his debts, &c. He then gave an estate to his could not be made in respect of the reversionnephew, Jobn Pollock, subject to an annuity ary property. of 401. to his, the testator's wife, and after appointing certain persons his trustees, he gave

Court of Queen's Bench. to them all his estate at Sowerby Row, in the parish of Castle Sowerby, and his estate at Meyers v. Tills. June 6, 1854. Longlands, in the parish of St. Mary Without, COUNTY COURT APPEAL. — TROVER.- EVIwith power to let the same, until all his nephews and nieces should be of the age of 21. He also gave to his sister 101. a year to be paid to

It appeared, on the trial of a plaint in the her for life, the other part of the rents to pay

County Court to recover possession of his just debts, in the event of any bonds or

goods, that on the plaintiff making a denotes standing against him at the time of his

mand, the defendant had replied he should death; and he directed that after the youngest

take advice, but had subsequently handed of his nephews and nieces should be of age,

them over to another party : Held, setting the estates should be sold by his trustees to the

aside the nonsuit with costs, that there was best advantage, and the price thereof go equally

a conversion and not a qualified refusal. share and share alike amongst all his nephews

The question, whether the facts amount to a and nieces, except the two named, and that,

conversion is one of law, on which an apshould his sister be living, then his trustees

peal will lie from the decision af a County should secure her 201. a year during her life,

Court Judge. and after her decease to be divided as above. This was an appeal from the decision of the No wood was to be cut or sold but what might Judge of the Rutland County Court, directing be wanted for necessary repairs of the build- a nonsuit in this plaint, to recover possession of ings which the testator left to the discretion of certain goods which were stolen from the plainhis trustees, The Vice-Chancellor having held tiff and found in the defendant's possession. It that the widow was put to her election in re- appeared that on the plaintiff making a demand, spect of her right of dower in the Sowerby and the defendant had replied he should take adLonglands' estates, this appeal was presented. vice, but had afterwards delivered them up to

Swanston and Bagshawe in support ; Glasse another party. The question was, whether and Murray, contrà; Willcock and Bovill for such delivery amounted to a conversion. other parties.

Hayes for the plaintiff'; T. Campbell Foster The Court said, that it was evidently the for the defendant, on the ground there was only testator's intention to discharge the realty from a qualified refusal, and that an appeal would the wife's dower, which was evidenced by the not lie. powers given to the trustees of cutting timber, The Court said, that the question, whether of granting leases

, and of sale, and the appeal the facts amounted to a conversion, was one of would therefore be dismissed.

law, for which an appeal would lie, and that as

the defendant had given the goods up to a Vice-Chancellor Kindersley. wrong party after a demand by the plaintiff, Adams v. Bennett. June 14, 1854.

who was found by the case to be the owner,

there was a conversion, and the nonsuit must EQUITY TO SETTLE- be set aside with costs. MENT OF REVERSIONARY INTEREST. Held, that the equity of a married woman to




Superior Courts : Queen's Bench.

149 Regina (exparte Watermen's Company) v. Read. question for the jury, and a rule for a new June 3, 7, 1854.

trial was refused. WATERMEN's

This was a rule nisi to set aside the verdiet MEANING OF WORD CRAFT " IN S. 37.

for the defendant and for a new trial. It ap

peared that the defendant occupied certain Held, that a steam tug is not within the 7 & works in Cumberland, under a lease from the

8 Geo. 4, c. lxxv., s.37, which imposes a pe- plaintiff, which contained a licence authorising nalty on any person, not being a freeman of him to carry on an iron manufacture on the the Watermen's Company, navigating any premises, that since 1849 he had used them wherry, lighter, " or other craft,on the for the manufacture of iron plates, which were riter Thames for hire.

afterwards tinned, and that the number of This was a case for the opinion of this chimneys had been consequently much inCourt on an appeal to the Sessions from a con. creased. On the trial, the jury found, upon viction under the 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. lxxv,, s. 37,' the question being left to them, that the works against the defendant for navigating a steam formed substantially an iron manufactory. tug on the river Thames both beyond and Pashley, Udall, and Lloyd showed cause within the limits of the Act, in taking a mer- against tht rule, which was supported by Edchant ship into one of the docks. It appeared ward James and Brett. that the defendant was neither a freeman of The Court said, that the question had been the company nor an apprentice to a freeman. properly left to the jury, and the rule was ac

M. Chambers and Ballantine in support of cordingly discharged. the conviction; Sir F. Thesiger and Milward, contrà, Tisdell v. Combe, 3 New. & P. 29, was cited.

Dress v. Savage. June 7, 8, 1854. The Court said, that although the words “or RULE NISI TO ENTER NONSUIT.-OBTAINING other craft " might be so used as to include a

JUDGE'S NOTES. steam tug, yet as this Act established a mo

On a rule nisi to set aside the verdict for the nopoly, and besides imposed a penalty, it plaintiff and enter a nonsuit, pursuant to should be construed strictly. These words leave reserved in an action, being called on, must be ejusdem generis with the preceding it appeared that the Judge's notes had not words "wherry" and "lighter," and did not been obtained. The case was struck out of include a steam tug. The case cited at bar, the list, and the rule was afterwards disand which decided that a steam tug was a charged. craft within 8. 57, did not apply, as that sec

This was a rule nisi obtained on April 19 tion was not to give a monopoly or impose a last, pursuant to leave reserved to set aside the penalty, but power to make regulations for the verdict for the plaintiff and enter a nonsuit in safety of the public. The conviction would, this action of ejectment to recover possession therefore, be quashed.

of certain premises upon the expiration of an

agreement for a lease for three years. It was Jackson v. Henderson. June 7, 1854.

contended that the defendant was a yearly

tenant, and could not be ejected without RIGHT OF LESSEE TO MANUFACTURE TIN-notice.

PLATES UNDER LICENCE TO CARRY ON The Court struck out the case, upon its apIRON MANUFACTORY.

pearing when it was called on that the Judge's It appeared that the defendant occupied cer- notes had not been obtained. tain premises under a lease, which contained

The rule was afterwards discharged on the a licence authorising his carrying on an application of Lush, who had been instructed iron manufactory, but that he had used the to show cause. premises for the manufacture of iron plates, which were afterwards tinned on the pre- Regina v. Alleyne and others. June 14, 1854. mises. The jury, in an action by the lessor, had found the works were substantially an

iron manufactory: Held, that it was a i Which enacts, that "if any person, not

Semble, that it is not open to the Attorneybeing a freeman of the said company, or an ap

General to appear for the defendants to prentice to a freeman, or to the widow of a free- show against a rule to quash a writ of man of the said company (except as hereinafter error upon the judgment in a prosecution is mentioned), shall at any time act as a water

on the ground that it had been sued out man or lighterman, or ply, or work, or navigate,



with a view to a compromise. or cause to be worked or navigated, any wherry, This was a rule nisi to quash the writ of highter, or other craft, upon the said river,, error upon the judgment in this prosecution, from or to any place or places, or ship or ves- on the ground that it had been sued out with a sel, within the limits of this act, for hire or view to a compromise. gain (except as hereinafter is mentioned) every The Attorney-General, Temple, and Huddlesuch person shall forfeit and pay for every ston, for the defendants, appeared to show such offence any sum not exceeding 101.”


« EelmineJätka »