cost of servants, and so on. In Field v. Peckett (29 Beav. 573) Lord Romilly held that two months was not too long a period. In that case the estate was a large one, and the sum allowed for expenses was over £400. The residue should be given to the widow for life, and then to the children in equal shares, or as directed by the testator. Assuming that the gift was to "the children," that was obviously a class gift, i.e., capable of increasing or diminishing because some of the children might die and others be born beyond those living at the death of the testator. It might be, however, that the gift was not to the testator's children, but to someone else, then the question would arise as to who would take. The rule was that it was in the testator's children living at the time of the testator's death, but that it would remain open to let in any children born between the death of the testator and the death of the tenant for life. In Hogben v. Neale (23 L. T. Rep. 681; L. Rep. 10 Eq. 48), it was held that any issue born after the death of the testator and before the death of the tenant for life would not take. It had been overruled in Sibley v. Perry (7 Ves. 522), and, a week or two since, a case had come before Mr. Justice Romer in which he refused to have anything to do with Hogben v. Neale, and held that children so born were entitled to come in. He would advise his hearers to be careful of the use of the expression, “ next of kin." The result of such an expression would be that the father and the mother of the children would all take together. They should be referred to as "the next of kin according to the statutes." In all cases they should go to the precedents and follow them. The clauses there had a well-recognised meaning, and as soon as people were found departing from them, suspicion was aroused and one wondered what they were trying to do. He would urge them when preparing wills to instruct their clients and, as far as they could, to curb their absurd suggestions that they sometimes made. Only a short time ago he (the lecturer) received instructions on behalf of a rich ice-cream purveyor for the drawing of his will, who wanted his barrows to be placed in strict settlement. Whilst sympathising deeply with the testator's feudal proclivities he recommended that in consideration of the uncertainties of the English climate a power of sale should be inserted with the view to the liquidation of the assets. Mr. Justice Eve, responding to a vote of thanks, said it was really a pleasure to see so many familiar faces before him. He could now look back for over five-and-forty years of active service in the Profession, and the longer he served the more did he become attached to it. When he first joined the Profession it was busy accommodating itself to the very important changes in practice and procedure brought about by the Judicature Act; and it looked as if, before the time came for him to leave the Profession, it would be busy again assimilating the new law embodied in the bundle of statutes which, it was anticipated, would come into operation early next year. He thought that opinions might reasonably differ as to whether the innovations, or the ultimate result of the innovations, would achieve all that those who had promoted and reduced them into form anticipated; in fact, he had some doubt whether they would afford sufficient return for the energy expended in operating it and the labour involved in unlearning a system which, through good repute and ill, had satisfactorily held its way for many centuries. Certain it was that there was no room for difference of opinion upon this, that the changes would involve, for a period so long as to be almost indefinite, an increased resort to legal practitioners, and he hoped with a corresponding increase in the total of their emoluments. In these circumstances they really could regard the impending revolution with a great deal of resignation, but with an acquisitive expectancy. The lecture had been a most interesting one. In conclusion, he expressed his regret that the petition of the association for a charter had not been successful. He hoped for better luck next time. UNITED LAW SOCIETY A MEETING of the society was held on Monday, the 23rd inst., in the Middle Temple Common Room, Mr. C. P. Blackwell in the chair. Mr. S. G. Champion opened: "That this House advocates the legislation of Euthanasia.” Mr. G. B. Burke opposed. There also spoke Messrs. F. H. Butcher, L. F. Stemp, F. B. Guedalla, H. W. Pritchard, J. W. Morris, Sydney Ashley, and W. S. Chaney (visitor). The hon. opener having replied, the motion was put to the House and lost by four votes. The society's annual general meeting will be held in the Middle Temple Common Room on Monday, the 6th April, at 7.30 p.m. HARROGATE AND DISTRICT LAW THE annual meeting of the above society was held at the Prospect Hotel, Harrogate, on Friday, the 13th inst. The president, Mr. E. P. Cross, was in the chair, supported amongst others, by Messrs. E. Raworth, W. Topham, R. W. Buchanan (Ripon), J. Butterworth, J. Lomas-Walker, H. S. Thompson, O. Chippindale, C. Barber, S. Barber, J. G. Greenwood, R. G. Paver-Crow, and J. E. A. Titley (hon. secretary). The minutes of the previous annual meeting having been read and confirmed the hon. secretary presented the report and also the statement of accounts for last year which were of a satisfactory nature, the latter showing a balance on the right side. The following officers were elected: president, J. E. A. Titley; hon. treasurer, C. E. Atkinson; hon. secretary, R. G. Paver-Crow; committee, R. W. Buchanan, C. A. Barber, J. A. Edison, J. Butterworth, J. W. Render, H. S. Thompson, W. Topham, J. Wilkinson, and E. P. Cross. Various matters of interest to the Profession were discussed, including the new Poor Persons Rules, Law of Property Act and other matters. The hon. secretary was requested to purchase certain books to add to the existing law library. A hearty vote of thanks to the retiring president (Mr. E. P. Cross) was carried with accord. LAW STUDENTS' JOURNAL TO SECRETARIES.-Reports of meetings should reach the office not later than Wednesday evening to ensure insertion in the current number. THE LAW SOCIETY RECEPTION BY TEACHING STAFF. THE members of the teaching staff of the Law Society's School of Law gave a reception to past and present students (years 1923-25) at the society's hall on Thursday, the 19th inst. Among those present were Lord Blanesburgh, Mr. W. H. Norton (president, Law Society) and Mr. E. R. Cook (secretary), with the following members of the council: Sir A. Copson Peake (Leeds), Sir Charles Morton (Liverpool), Sir Robert Dibdin, Messrs. C. G. May, A. H. Coley (Birmingham), R. M. Welsford (Chairman of the Legal Education Committee), and Charles Macintosh, Master Chandler, Messrs J. W. Ross-Brown, K.C., Prof. H. C. Gutteridge, Dr. F. Carr, Messrs. W. C. Bolland, Gilbert Hurst, A. J. Vere Bass, with the following former members of the teaching staff: Dr. Edward Jenks, Dr. A. D. McNair, Dr. W. G. Hart, and Mr. G. C. Tyndale. Dr. LESLIE BURGIN (principal and director of studies) welcomed the guests on behalf of his colleagues and everybody connected with the school. Lord BLANESBURGH said that most of those he was addressing were members, as they believed, of the greatest of all professions, a profession which called for no particular confession of faith, but which did inculcate high principles and the necessity in all relations of life of being absolutely fair in all respects between man and man, with the particular claim that there was something that its members cast into the common stock of ideas outside their ordinary practice. One of the greatest of their possessions as members of the Profession was, from his own personal knowledge, the extraordinary reputation which all over Europe, and he believed in every part of the world, the Profession had gained for fairness and impartiality to all who came into the courts of law with the certainty that no kind of preference was given to one over another and that even enemy residents in this country were entitled to free access to the courts during the course of the War with the knowledge that they would receive the same justice that would be dealt out to the citizens of this country. It was difficult to realise the effect that this feeling had on the minds of the people of other nations. It had been his good fortune, for two or three years, between 1915 and 1919, in the course of dealing with enemy property in this country in order that it might be preserved until the conclusion of peace and then be dealt with as might be prescribed by Parliament, to sit week by week in the Chambers in Carey-street when he saw representatives of the German and Austrian banks which were being wound up under special legislation. In the course of that work he came into contact with the managers and officials of the banks who had been permitted to remain in this country in order that the administration of the banks might be carried on when all questions of administration and of getting in large sums of money were enquired into, and it would not have been possible to complete the business except for their assistance. After a time these gentlemen were permitted to return to Germany or Austria, as the case might be, and he had been very much impressed with the message that was sent to him after they had left to the effect that they desired to let him, and through him, all the officials of the court know that they would never forget the extraordinary courtesy and fairness with which they had been received during the whole time of their detention, and that they should take care when they went to their homes to let the people know how well they had been treated. He might also mention another very remarkable thing in relation to the reputation of the law of England. About a month ago he went to Paris to sit on the Reparations Committee, and he and the other English delegates were received by the French President. He thought he might justify his presence on the committee by referring to the English judicial oath, and he said it was a very great responsibility to find himself in a place entirely unlike any other in which he had formerly moved, that for the last ten years he had been under the sanction of the English judicial oath. He told then that under that oath he was bound to do justice to all manner of men without fear or favour, affection or ill-will." And he said that it seemed to him perhaps that to have been educated in that school might be some qualification for the position. He did not think anything of the statement at the moment, but he was very much astonished when three of the delegates from other countries came to him and said they had been very much struck by what he had said, that they had no idea that that was the nature of the oath taken by the English judges, and that they now understood why it was that when 66 a foreigner appeared in an English court of law he received exactly the same treatment as would an Englishman. In concluding he reminded his hearers that theirs was a profession of service. It was a great thing to be nurtured in such a profession. It was true that they were remunerated for their work, but the work they did for their clients was not proportionate to their hire but to the interests of their clients. The clients came to the members of the Profession in their difficulties and the members of the Profession fought their battles for them in a way in which they could never fight their own. So that it was idle to put any other sense to the words that they were spending themselves and being spent in the service of others, and it was a great thing to be able to say so much for any profession. Theirs was a profession, but above all things it was a vocation. He felt that the young men when they went out into practice for themselves after having received instruction would remember that they were intrusted with great responsibility and great opportunity for using the knowledge they had acquired in difficult cases. The PRESIDENT proposed a hearty vote of thanks to Lord Blanesburgh, who, he said, was a very old friend of the society. Mr. R. M. WELSFORD Seconded the motion which was carried with acclamation. Lord BLANESBURGH briefly responded. Mr. E. VERNON MILES, jun., then presented to Dr. Jenks a portrait of himself, painted by Mr. F. M. Bennett, which had been subscribed for by past students of the school, of which Dr. Jenks was for twenty-one years Principal and Director of Legal Studies, resigning in July last to become Professor of English Law at the University of London. Dr. JENKS, in returning thanks, said that memories crowded to his mind of former days spent within those walls. He very cordially appreciated the kindness shown in making the presentation. The time when he was at the school was very happy. Of course, he could never forget that there was one very deep element of sadness, in that, during the years of the war, some sixty of the gallant company of students gave their lives for their country. They would never be forgotten, even if their names had not been inscribed on the tablet to their memory at the hall. He did feel tremendously proud of the manner in which he had been treated by the 2200 students who passed through the school during the period when he was connected with it. In all those years the number of serious cases of discipline could be counted on the fingers of a single hand, and he doubted whether any other educational institution in the world could show a better record. He expressed his indebtedness to the council for the great and unceasing confidence they had imposed in him and in his colleagues, who had most cordially and generously placed their brilliant talents and co-operation at the service of the school. Certainly, not least of all did he feel that the success of the school was due to the spirit of cordiality, comradeship and good fellowship which from the very first day of its existence had prevailed between the scholars and the teaching staff. He would ask the council to allow him to hand the portrait over to the society, in the hope that it might find a place in the building, preferably in the Students' Rooms. The PRESIDENT accepted the portrait on behalf of the society. STUDENTS' SOCIETIES LAW STUDENTS' DEBATING SOCIETY.-At a meeting of the society theld at the Law Society's Hall on Tuesday, the 24th March (chairman, Mr. V. R. Aronson), the subject for debate was “That this House regrets the decision of the House of Lords in Edwards v. Porter (132 L. T. Rep. 496; (1925) A. C. 1)." Mr. L. F. Stemp opened in the affirmative, Miss G. O. Peterson seconded in the affirmative; Mr. J. W. Morris opened in the negative, Miss D. C. Johnson seconded in the negative. The following members also spoke Messrs. John F. Chadwick, W. M. Pleadwell, J. H. F. Gethin, M. J. Hart Leverton, W. S. Jones, J. R. Amphlett, E. G. M. Fletcher, H. Spencer Wilkinson, and A. D. Waldror. The opener having replied, and the chairman having summed up, the motion was lost by two votes. There were twenty-five members and three visitors present. SHEFFIELD AND DISTRICT.--At a meeting of the above society held in the Law Library, Bank-street, Sheffield, on Tuesday, the 3rd inst., when Mr. Lawrence J. Kirkham, hon. member., was in the chair, the subject for discussion was as follows: Twicer is indicted for bigamy with Beatrix, his wife Fay being still alive. Twicer's defence is that at the date of the ceremony with Beatrix he had an honest and reasonable belief (though the fact was otherwise) that Fay's husband was still alive at the time of his marriage to Fay. Is this a valid defence? Mr. J. T. Capron, supported by Mr. R. L. Frank, opened on behalf of the affirmative; and Mr. L. S. Hiller, supported by Mr. H. Stone, on behalf of the negative. An interesting discussion followed in which the following members took part Messrs. Bolsover, Burney, Dingle, Dunn, Nicholson, and Thorneloe. Mr. Frank and Mr. Hiller replied, and after the chairman had summed up the question was decided in the negative by two votes. At another meeting of the society held on Tuesday, the 17th March, Mr. James E. Wing, hon. member, was in the chair, and the subject for debate was the following: "That the case of Reg. v. Ashwell (1885, 53 L. T. Rep. 773; 16 Q. B. Div. 190) was wrongly decided." Mr. A. B. Thorneloe and Mr. R. C. Penhale opened the case for the affirmative, and Mr. D. Dunn, supported by Mr. P. Dingle, that for the negative. An interesting discussion followed the opening speeches and all the members present spoke. After Mr. Dunn and Mr. Thorneloe had replied the chairman summed up, and the votes being equal, the chairman gave his casting vote for the affirmative. The next and last meeting of the society for the present session will be held on Tuesday, the 7th April. THE LAW SOCIETY'S SCHOOL OF LAW.-A moot was held on Tuesday, March 24th, in the Society's Hall, at which the following case was argued in the nature of an appeal from the King's Bench Division: "Christopher Jones being anxious to acquire a secondhand car of reputable make instructed John Smith, a dealer in motor-cars, to procure a secondhand Vauxhall car for him. John Smith himself owned a Vauxhall in excellent condition, which was produced in 1921, but which he believed to be a 1922 model. Smith offered this to Jones, as a 1922 model, for £500, but concealed the fact that it was his own car. Jones accordingly purchased the car in July 1923, and paid Smith £500 and a commission of £10, relying on Smith's representation that the car was a 1922 model. In July 1924 Jones discovered from the Vauxhall works that the car was really a 1921 model; but, as he was about to start on a holiday and wished to use the car during his holiday, said nothing to Smith until Sept. 1924. Smith declined to take the car back, and, on the 27th Oct. 1924, Jones commenced an action for rescission of the sale, and repayment of £510. The car is still perfectly sound, but between July 1923 and Oct. 1924, its value depreciated by £100. In July 1923 the market value of a 1921 model was approximately £430. In the court below, judgment was given ordering rescission of the sale and repayment of £510 to Jones. From this judgment Smith has appealed." The court consisted of Mr. E. C. S. Wade (vice-principal), and Messrs. S. E. Mann and F. C. Brasher, two students of the school. "Counsel" for the appellant were Messrs. S. D. Herington and J. A. Plowman. Counsel" for the respondent were Messrs. E. H. Lethbridge Kingsford and A. C. D. Ensor. The moot, as on the previous occasion, was well attended. The court by a majority varied the judgment of the court below, and ordered the repayment to Jones of the £10 commission, together with an account of the profits, if any, made by the appellant on the transaction. APPOINTMENTS Information intended for publication under the above heading should reach us not later than Wednesday evening in each week, as publication is otherwise delayed. COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION Mr. ARTHUR JACOB ASHTON, K.C. has been appointed to be Head of the Inns of Court School of Law and Director of Legal Studies. Mr. Ashton was called by the Inner Temple in 1881 and took silk in 1906. Mr. JOSEPH GERALD PEASE, C.B.E. has been appointed to be Reader in Common Law. Mr. Pease was called by the Inner Temple in 1887. Mr. ROLAND BURROWS, LL.D. has been appointed to be Reader in Evidence, Procedure (Civil and Criminal) and Criminal Law, Mr. Burrows was called by the Inner Temple in 1904. Mr. CYRIL ASQUITH has been appointed to be Assistant-Reader in Common Law. Mr. Asquith was called by the Inner Temple in 1920. Mr. F. HINDLE, solicitor, Darwen, has been appointed Clerk to the Justices for the Borough of Darwen, in succession to his father, the late Mr. F. G. Hindle. Mr. F. Hindle was admitted in 1899. Mr. JOHN RICHARDSON, Solicitor, of Appleby, has been appointed to be Coroner for the East and West Wards of Westmorland, in succession to Mr. William Williamson, who has resigned the position. Mr. Richardson was admitted in 1895. NOTES AND QUERIES This column is intended for the use of members of the Legal Profession, and therefore queries from lay correspondents cannot be inserted. Under no circumstances are editorial replies undertaken. 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 27. WILL-LEGACIES-PAYMENT.-A. dies in 1925 having by her will given several pecuniary legacies amounting in the aggregate to about £600. She has omitted to appoint executors and to bequeath the residue of her property, which includes six freehold houses. She has appointed two trustees as trustees to see that my will is duly effected." In the will it is stated the payment of all the bequests within mentioned I charge against part of my estate known as P. (after payment of the incumbrance thereon) and the conversion thereof by sale into money," but this property (P.) was sold by the deceased in her lifetime and she appears to have utilised the balance (the property was mortgaged) of the purchase money to pay off the mortgage debt charged on the six freehold houses, five of which are included in the residue and now undisposed of and upon one of the freehold houses devised by testatrix's will. The personal estate will be insufficient to meet the debts and legacies. It is presumed that there is no ademption of the legacies, in spite of the fund out of which they were to become payable being non-existent, but what is not clear is whether these legacies (or what sum may be required after the personal estate is exhausted) are payable out of the real estate. Some of the text-books state that they are payable out of "the general estate," and one states "out of the personal estate." Are they not payable out of the realty as against the heir-at-law, and cannot the trustees, who are now held to be executors according to the tenor" entitled to sell the real estate for payment of the lagacies ? LEX. 66 28. SETTLEMENT PRECEDENT.-A. is seised in fee simple of a one-third interest in certain freehold estates, such one-third producing net annual rentals of £1500. He desires to secure to each of three daughters an annual income of £200 each out of his onethird interest in such freeholds for the remainder of his life, but of course limited to the lives of each daughter in case any of them die before him. (By his will he is leaving his third interest in such freeholds to the daughters equally.) It is desired to know how this should be carried out for same to be effective, and at the same time to avoid any heavy stamp duties, and to keep in mind the question of death duties. In view of these points to be borne in mind, could you indicate the method to be adopted and refer to any precedent? Please point out the stamp duty involved. Any variation of the terms of settlement which would ease the position as to stamp duties and death duties would be considered, as for instance, instead of giving the income to the daughters for the lifetime of the testator, such income to be given to them absolutely outright, or instead of limiting the income to a daughter's life, in case she predeceased the testator, giving same to her outright without such limitation. If the intervention of trustees is necessary it is not desired to go outside A. and his three daughters. B. & W. a 29. BUILDING CONTRACT SURETY-BOND.-A. is having number of houses erected on certain land and he has advertised for tenders. The contract to be signed by the builder whose tender is accepted stipulates that the houses must be completed by a fixed date, but the contract also contains the usual clauses that the date of completion shall be extended in the case of strike, lock-out, force majeure, unforeseen and unavoidable circumstances, and for extras on architect's certificate. The contract also contains a clause for the payment of a sum of money per house as liquidated damages in respect of each week after the fixed date until completion. It is presumed that as the contract provides for a possible postponement of the date of completion that time ceases to be of the essence of the contract and the liquidated damages would not be recoverable: (See Lamprell v. The Billericay Union, 1849, 3 Ex. 283). Is this correct? If A. makes the builder find a surety, who executes a bond jointly with the builder for a sum of money, the bond reciting the contract, and the houses to be completed by a fixed date and conditioned to be void if the terms of the said contract are properly carried out, will such bond be enforceable against the surety if the builder does not complete the houses on the fixed date or a subsequent date fixed by the architect under the provisions for delay mentioned above? Opinions and authorities will greatly oblige. LEX. 30. REGISTRATION OF BUSINESS NAMES ACT 1916.-A father, J. S., carried on business as "J. S." for a great number of years. About twelve months ago J. S. takes into partnership his son, T. S., and carries on business as "J. S. and Son." The addition of "and Son being descriptive of the relationship of the two partners, it apparently is " an addition other than the true Christian names of individual partners or initials of such Christian names" : (see 1 (a) of the Act). We have, however, heard that registration is not required in such cases. Can authorities substantiating the rumour be cited, or any information given? FIREBRACE. 31. INCOME TAX ACT 1918-RULE 8 OF No. 5, ScHED. A.-Clients of ours own houses, shops and offices. The cost of repairs in respect of the houses alone exceeds the one-sixth allowance, but such cost in respect of the houses with the shops, factories and offices does not exceed the allowance. For the purposes of excess maintenance relief under the above rule our clients contend that land or houses " does not include shops, factories or offices, but the revenue claims that the words "and other buildings (if any)' in the phrase "(inclusive of farmhouses and other buildings (if any)" in rule 8 (3) as amended by sect. 25 of the Finance Act 1922 includes shops, factories or offices. We shall be glad of your readers' views or particulars of any authorities. D. H. AND Co. 32. AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS ACT.-In 1913 A. by agreement lets to B. a farm and lands at £50 a year. Sect. 22 of 1908 Act is excluded. In 1920 the rent is raised to £60 under a memo endorsed on the said agreement and C. (son of B.) is added as co-tenant. The said agreement provides for sale of the sheep on quitting the farm at £1 each to the landlord, being the same price as paid by the landlord to the tenant on entering in 1913. This price is now much below the market price of sheep. (1) Is the 1913 agreement still valid and can landlord enforce the sheep clause referred to? (2) Is estate duty payable on death of B. under the agreement price or the present-day valuation of the sheep? X. Y. Z. ANSWERS (Q. 24.).—LICENSED PREMISES-WIRELESS-MUSIC.-It is submitted that a music licence is necessary because the use of the café to hear music by wireless is-as it must be-habitual : (see note on p. 1129 of the 1925 edition of Stone's Justices' Manual). The case mentioned in the query is distinguishable. There the proprietor provided a piano but did not play on it. Nor did anyone else except his customers. Here the proprietor, by the acts of providing a wireless installation and of tuning in to the wireless station, makes any transmission of music which is taking place a performance of that music in the café. G. O. S. (Q. 25.) TRUST-INCOME-TIME PAYABLE.-It would seem that the trustees are confusing interest and income. Interest on the £10,000 is not payable until a year after the testator's death: (Re Whittaker, 21 Ch. Div. 657). But if the £10,000 is invested during the first year after the testator's death E. J. and M. J. are jointly entitled to the income from the time of the investment : (La Terriere v. Bulmer, 2 Sim. 18; Gibson v. Bott, 7 Ves. 89 ; Angerstein v. Martin, T. & R. 240; Lewin on Trusts, 10th edit., p. 326). G. O. S. An executor is allowed one year from testator's death to ascertain and settle his affairs, and general legacies do not carry interest until the year has elapsed: (Wood v. Penoyre, 13 Ves. 333; Walford v. Walford, 107 L. T. Rep. 657; (1912) A. C. 658). An exception exists in the case of a legacy to a child by a parent, or one in loco parentis. An annuity commences from testator's death, and the first payment is due at the expiration of the year : (Gibson v. Bott, 7 Ves. 96; and see Re Robbins, 96 L. T. Rep. 755; (1907) 2 Ch. 8), but if a legacy is given for life with remainder over, no interest is due till the end of two years. A sum of money directed to be placed out to produce an annuity is to be considered as a legacy payable at the end of a year and not as an annuity payable from the death: (Gibson v. Bott, 7 Ves. 97; Re Friend, 78 L. T. Rep. 222). No interest on the £10,000 can, it is submitted, be claimed until two years from the death, when one year's interest only will be due. The year's allowance, however, is only for convenience, and executors may, if the state of the deceased's affairs allow of it, pay the legacies sooner (Pearson v. Pearson, 1 Sch. & Lef. 12; Garsthorne v. Chalie, 10 Ves. 13). JOHN BOYD. 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. BANKERS' PROTECTION.-In your recent issue of the 28th Feb last you inserted a short article headed as above, and in that article you add "that the official receiver is in the habit of notifying the making of the order to the bank concerned as soon as possible without waiting for the Gazette notice so that cases of real hardship are not likely to arise." We venture to state, however, that is not our experience. A case that came to our knowledge recently was that of a bank against one of whose customers a receiving order had been made. The bank were not made acquainted of the fact by the official receiver until two days after by telephone. Meanwhile they had paid away some of their customer's money, which they were subsequently called upon to refund to the official receiver. We are informed that it is by no means an uncommon occurrence for the publication of a receiving order in the London Gazette to be held over for some days, and under those circumstances it is quite possible that a banker might be held accountable to refund to the official receiver not merely a question of a few pounds but possibly hundreds or thousands of pounds. But the hardship does not end here. The unfortunate banker having paid away the money in ignorance that a receiving order had previously been made, his claim arises after the bankruptcy, and consequently he has no right of redress or recovery or even a right to prove in the bankruptcy. In short, our experience is the very opposite of the conclusion arrived at in your article, and is that cases of real hardship do frequently occur and the matter is one that, in our opinion, urgently calls for remedial legislation. ANDREW, WOOD, PURVES, AND SUTTON. Dr. Ernest Joseph Schuster, K.C., LL.D., who died on the 10th Dec., aged seventy-four, left unsettled property of the gross value of £260,633. Mr. Thomas Walters, solicitor, of Penllwyn Park, Carmarthen, who died on the 2nd Jan., aged seventy-five, left property of the gross value of £43,171. OBITUARY Mr. ARTHUR Jacob Ashton, K.C., died suddenly on the 22nd inst. at the age of seventy years. Mr. Ashton was the eldest son of Mr. Walter Ashton, of Warrington, and was educated at Warrington Grammar School and Balliol College, Oxford. He was called by the Inner Temple in 1881, and went the Northern Circuit. Mr. Ashton took silk in 1906, and was elected a Bencher of his Inn in 1914, in which year he was made Recorder of Manchester. In 1921 he was made a Judge of Appeal for the Isle of Man, and on several occasions acted as Commissioner of Assize, positions which he filled with marked success. Only last week Mr. Ashton was appointed to be Director of Legal Studies at the Inns of Court. His book of recollections, As I Went Upon My Way, was a charming work of well-written prose, revealing an attractive personality. Mr. THOMAS SMITH, solicitor, of Halifax, Yorkshire, died there recently at the age of sixty-one years. Mr. Smith was admitted in 1904 and was a member of the firm of Messrs. Rice, Jones, and Smith. He was much respected in Halifax. Mr. GWILYM CRISTOR JAMES, solicitor, died recently at Abergavenny. Mr. James was admitted in 1872 and practised at Merthyr Tydfil for over fifty years. He was a Justice of the Peace for the county of Brecknock and received the O.B.E. in 1920. Mr. WILLIAM SHERIDAN LE FANU, secretary and treasurer to the Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty died on the 22nd inst. at the age of sixty-three years. He was the son of Mr. W. R. Le Fanu, Commissioner of Public Works, Ireland, and was educated at Haileybury and at St. John's College, Cambridge. Mr. Le Fanu was called by the Middle Temple in 1886. He joined the staff on Queen Anne's Bounty in 1890 and was considered an excellent administrator and an authority on Church matters. Mr. HENRY MEESON MORRIS, solicitor, died at All Stretton on the 20th inst. at the age of seventy-four years. Mr. Morris was admitted in 1873, and was a member of the firm of Messrs. Sprott and Morris, of Shrewsbury, where he practised for more than fifty years. Mr. Morris was Clerk to the Justices of the Condover Division and Clerk to the Commissioners for Taxes for Condover and Chirbury. He was a member of the Solicitors' Benevolent Association. Mr. ALBERT CHARLES HAYES, solicitor, of Birmingham, died at Moseley on the 19th inst. at the age of sixty-two years. Mr. Hayes was admitted in 1892 and filled many public offices; he was a member of the King's Norton Urban Council and the Worcestershire County Council, displaying both ability and independence of character. His practice was largely in the County Court and the Police Court. Mr. FREDERICK JAMES MANN, solicitor, of Hastings, died there on the 17th inst., at the age of seventy-four years. Mr. Mann was admitted in 1871, and practised in Hastings for many years, retiring in 1904. Mr. Mann was much interested in the Royal Naval Artillery Volunteers and other local matters. He was a member of the Solicitors' Benevolent Association. Mr. James Newton Graham, solicitor, of Tywardreath, Cornwall, who died on the 3rd Jan., left estate of the gross value of £23,421. (BLOOMSBURY). (DUDLEY). Gidden v. Mills 117 WORCESTERSHIRE - Wise v. Sedgley Urban District 118 Cleeves Western Valleys Anthracite Collieries ld. v. Waddell & Co. Id. 120 WARWICKSHIRE (BIRMINGHAM).– Bevington v. Perks (Bell Assce. Soc., third party) 121 GLAMORGANSHIRE (CARDIFF). Parkinson v. McLeod (Hull) ld. 122 SURREY (LAMBETH).-Bainbridge v. Congdon 123 HERTFORDSHIRE (ST. ALBANS).White v. Cocks 125 MIDDLESEX (CLERKENWELL). Brilliant Sign Co. (1907) Id. v. Coy 126 MIDDLESEX (WESTMINSTER). Burkill v. Morgan-Jones Hey wood & ors. v. Haines & Wife 129 WARWICKSHIRE (NUNEATON). Masters, &c. Apothecaries of London v. Ashton 130 BEDFORDSHIRE (LUTON).—Barber v. Pratt Burt v. 131 SUSSEX (BRIGHTON). Schwier 132 LEICESTERSHIRE (LOUGHBOROUGH) -Gamble v. Johnson 133 KENT (ROCHESTER).-Wenborn & anr. v. Barton & Wife 134 MIDDLESEX(Bow).—A. W.ld. v. Cooper & Hall ld. 135 SURREY (CROYDON).-Curtis Southern Ry. Co. 136 YORKSHIRE (KINGSTON HULL).-Leader & V. UPON Wife V. 137 LINCOLNSHIRE (GREAT GRIMSBY). -Freeborn v. Leeming 138 MIDDLESEX (MARYLEBONE). Young v. Russell 139 SURREY (CROYDON).-Betts Herbert Dees ld. V. 140 Shaw & anr. v. White & ors. 141 KENT (FOLKESTONE).-Knight v. Woods & anr. 142 MIDDLESEX (MARYLEBONE). White & anr. v. Pope 143 E. M. Dower & Co. Corrie, v. MacColl & Son ld. 144 LANCASHIRE (SOUTHPORT). Needham v. R. Woodhead & Co. ld. 145 MIDDLESEX Sneiman (Bow).-Ward V. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.-A., Admiralty; A.O., Administration Orders; Adj., Adjournments; B., Bankruptcy; E., Equity; E.L., Employers' Liability; G., General Business; J.S., Judgment Summonses; L., List; P., Plaints only; Pos., Possession Cases; R., Registrar; R.B., Registrar in Bankruptcy; 8., Special Sittings; W.C., Workmen's Compensation; † No Returns received. MAY HOUR Bishop Auckland.. Blaenavon Blandford Wednesday29 Ohelmsford Thursday 9.. 10.30 Cheltenham Friday 24... Friday 22.. 10 Monday 6.. Tuesday 7. Wednesday 8 Wednesday 22 Thursday 23. Friday 24... Monday 27. Tuesday 28. Wednesday29 Thursday 30. Chapel-en-le-Frith.. Wednesday 8 Thursday 2.. Thursday 7.. Fri 17 (RB).. Fri 8 (RB) Thursday 23. Thursday 14. ... 10.30 Friday 8 10.30 Friday 15 10.30 10 (& RB,12.30) Friday 17. 10 Friday 22 10.30 Friday 24.. 10 Guildford Friday 29 10.30 Wednesday29 Thursday 7.. Saturday 18. Tuesday 12.. 10.15 Wed 8 (R)... Tuesday 12.. 10 Thursday 2.. Thursday 21. 10 Hadleigh Halesworth. 9.45 Saturday 16. 10.30 Wednesday20 11.30 Thursday 30. 9.45 Halifax Thursday 16. Thursday 14. " Tuesday 5.. 11 Thursday 7.. 10 Thursday 21. Wednesday 1 t 10.30 Halstead Thursday 2.. 10.30 Haltwhistle. Friday 8 Friday 8 12 10.15 Friday 3.. 10.30 Hanley Monday 6. 10.30 10.30 Harleston Monday 11.. 10 10.30 Harrogate. 10.30 Harwich Friday 3 Friday 17 Friday 1 10 Friday 29 10 Monday 4... 10.30 10.30 Hastings Monday 27.. 10.30 Tues 21 (S) Tues 28 (JS). 10.30 Haverfordwest Wednesday29 10.30 Haverhill Thursday 30. 10.30 Hay Olitheroe Tues 28 (R).. Tues 26 (R).. 3 Haywards Heath.. Cockermouth Colchester Thursday 7.. 9.30 Helmsley.. Wednesday 1 Wednesday 6 Thursday 2.. Thursday 7.. t 10.30 Helston 10.30 Colwyn Bay " Congleton Consett Conway Corwen Coventry. Tues 28 (S).. Tuesday 19.. 10.45 10.30 10.30 Hertford Hexham&Bell'gham High Wycombe Hinckley Honiton Horncastle Howden Huddersfield. Hungerford. Huntingdon 10.30 Hythe 10.30 Thursday 2.. Thursday 7.. 10 Tuesday 26.. 12 Wednesday22 † Monday 20.. Friday 29... 10 Tuesday 28.. Tuesday 12.. 10 Wednesday 8 Wednesday 6 11 Thursday 23. Thursday 14. 10 Fri 17, 10.30. Mon 11 (R) 11 Monday 6... Monday 11.. 10 Wednesday15 Tuesday 12.. 10 Friday 15 Tuesday 19.. 10 Tuesday 5... 10.30 Thursday 23. Thursday 21. Monday 6... Monday 4... 10.30 Tuesday 7... Thursday 14. Mon 6 (RB). Mon 11 (RB) Monday 27.. Monday 25.. Tuesday 28.. Tuesday 26. Wednesday29 Wednesday27 Thursday 30. Thursday 28. Wednesday 1 Monday 4... Thursday 2.. Tuesday 5... Friday 3 Wednesday 6 Thursday 7.. Friday 8 Wednesday29 Wednesday20 Thursday 30. Thursday 21. Wednesday 1 Wednesday13 9.30 Fri 24 (R) Monday 6 Monday 4. Wednesday27 Thursday 2.. 9.30 9.30 Hull Fri 29 (R) .. 11.15 t Hyde ford.. 10 10.15 Ilkeston. Ipswich Jarrow. Keighley Kendal Tuesday 26.. 11 Monday 18 Wednesday22 Wednesday20 10 Thursday 23. Thursday 21. 10 Friday 24 Friday 3.... Wednesday22 Wednesday20 10 Monday 6... Monday 4... 10.15 Tuesday 7... Tuesday 5... 10.15 ..(R B) Each Tuesday Each Tuesday Thursday 30. Thursday 21. Monday 27.. Tuesday 28.. + Folkestone Fri 24 (R), 11 Thursday 28. 10 Thursday 23. Fri 1 (& R).. 10.30 Fri 24 (& R). Monday 4... 10.30 Mon 27 (& R) Tuesday 5... 10.30 Wednesday20 10.30 Fri 22 (& R). 10.30 Monday 25.. 10.30 Wednesday27 10.30 Thursday 28. 10.30 Saturday 23. 12 Wednesday 1 Wednesday 6 Friday 24 Friday 22 ... 10 Tuesday 7... Tuesday 5... 10 Wednesday 8 Wednesday 6 10 Tuesday 28.. ... Tuesday 28. Friday 24 Tuesday 19.. Tuesday 28.. Tuesday 19.. 10.30 Monday 27.. Mon 11 (R) .. 10.30 Monday 6... Tuesday 5... 10 Tuesday 21.. Tuesday 5.. 9 Monday 18.. 11 Kingston-on-Thames Friday 3 11.45 10 Monday 27.. Friday 22 Monday 20.. Monday 18.. 10.30 Wednesday27 11.15 Tues 7 (R) Friday 3 Friday 22 Wednesday 1 t Friday 8. Tuesday 21.. Friday 24 Friday 15 Wednesday13 10 Tuesday 12.. 10 10 10.30 10.30 10.30 10.30 10.30 10.30 10.30 10.30 10.30 10 10 F 3 (R 9.30). Saturday 4.. Monday 6.. Saturday 25. Monday 27.. Tu 28 (R9.30) Wednesday29 Thursday 30. Thursday 2.. Thursday 7.. 10 Wednesday15 Wednesday13 11 Th 2 (JS&AO) Monday 18.. 10 10.15 Tues 7 (RB). Tues 5 (RB). 11 Tues 21 (RB) 11 Wednesday22 Wednesday 6 10.15 Thursday 23. Thursday 7.. 10.15 Friday 24 Friday 8 10.15 |