AN INDEX TO THE PRINCIPAL MATTERS. ACCOUNTS. See LUNACY (Committee, 5). 2. A. died intestate in the year In September, 1843, he filed a bill seek- 3. In considering whether a decree Ib. 4. The rule laid down in Vernon v. APPEAL. See ENROLMENT. JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES WIND- 1. Where an order was varied on appeal, upon grounds which were not mentioned to the Court below, the party moving was ordered to pay the costs of the application. Steele v. Plomer, 149 2. In determining the question of costs, on an appeal, the Lord Chancellor places himself in the situation of the Judge in the Court below; and, if the motion has been improperly granted there, the Lord Chancellor reverses the order made, with the costs incurred in the original motion. Beardmer v. The London and North Western Railway Company, 161 3. Where, upon an appeal to the Lord Chancellor, he considers that the cause ought not to be disposed of without sending a case to a Court of common law, the decree appealed from should be reversed, and a case directed: and the cause is then remitted for subsequent proceedings to that branch of the Court from which the appeal was made. Salkeld v. Johnston, 329 4. The Master charged with the winding up of a Company, having, on two separate occasions, declined to place the name of J. P. on the list of contributories, either on his own account or in the character of a personal representative, and the Vice-Chancellor having, on two distinct appeals from those decisions, affirmed the same, an application was made to the Lord Chancellor to vary the two orders of the Vice-Chancellor, and asking that J. P. might be included in the list of contributories, as a contributory either in his own right or as personal representative of his late father, for a certain number of shares in the Company, or any less number of shares, and 5. The Judge in the Court below, having, at the request and with the consent of both the Plaintiff and Defendant, undertaken to decide a cause, although he considered the question raised proper for an issue:-Held, that although the parties, by their recorded consent in the decree appealed from, had precluded themselves from asking for an investigation of the claim, the subject-matter of the suit, before a jury, the Court would permit the Appellant to shew, if he could, that what he claimed was so far free from doubt as to entitle him to the decree sought by his bill, without the intervention of a jury; but if he fails in doing so, the appeal will be dismissed. Stewart v. Forbes, 461 6. Semble, parties to a suit cannot, by their consent or other acts, on a rehearing or appeal, call on the Court to decide on a matter which, in the usual course, ought to be sent to and determined by another tribunal. Ib. 7. Effect upon proceedings on appeal, where the Court below offered to send a case for the opinion of a Court of law, but the parties concurred in asking for the decision of the Court without a case. The fact of such a proceeding ought to be stated in the decree. Cole v. Scott, 477 8. Observations upon the conduct of a Defendant who appeals without having taken any part in the discussion in the Court below. Christ's Hospital v. Grainger, 533 9. The Court, on an appeal, looks at what the Appellant seeks to correct, BUILDING SOCIETY. A member of a building society purchased shares, in respect of which a sum of money was advanced to him, and he executed a conveyance to the trustees of the society, to secure the payment and observance by him of all subscriptions, fines, and regulations of the society; and, in default, the trustees were to sell, and retain out of the proceeds, all such subscriptions and other payments as should be then due, and should thereafter become due, in respect of those shares, calculating the probable duration of the society; and it was agreed, that all monies which should thereafter be come due, should be considered as due at the time of the sale. By the rules of the society, a purchasing member was entitled to redeem, upon payment of the difference between the amount secured by the mortgage, and the amount of his subscriptions and his share of the profits. No profits had been made in this case:-Held, that the Plaintiff was not entitled to redeem, upon payment of the difference between the sum advanced and the amount paid by him for subscriptions, &c.; but only upon payment of all subscriptions which would become payable during the probable duration of the society; and that those future subscriptions were to be paid in full at the time of redemption. Mosley v. Baker, CHARITY. See CORPORATION, 1. 301 serted in case of the misapplication of the trust property. A misapplication having taken place, it was held that the gift over was not repugnant to the original gift, nor void on the ground of perpetuity; that the forfeiture was still operative, and that the claim of the Plaintiffs [Christ's Hospital], was not barred by the lapse of more than twenty years from the time at which the misapplication of the trust property took place, and was known to them, and that they were entitled to call for a transfer of the property. Christ's Hospital v. Grainger, CHARITY TRUSTEES. 533 1. The Court does not act on its own knowledge of the fitness of parties named in a petition seeking the appointment of new trustees in the room of deceased trustees of charities, but makes the usual reference to the Master. In re The Shrewsbury Municipal Charities, and In re The Governors and Trustees of the Free Grammar School at Shrewsbury, 204 2. Where a party set up an unfounded claim, and in consequence of such claim was served with a petition, the Court declined making any order as to his costs. Ib. 3. On a petition seeking a reference for the appointment of new trustees in the room of deceased trustees of corporation charities, the Court declined giving any directions for any attendance on behalf of the corporation before the Master. Ib. CHARTERPARTY. By a charterparty, certain monthly payments were agreed to be made by the charterers to the ship-owners on account of freight, and the remainder was to be paid when the ship returned. But the real agreement between the parties was, that the adventure COLLEGE STATUTES. should be at their joint risk. The charterparty was allowed to remain in the hands of the owners, who deposited it with their bankers as a security for monies lent by them. The bankers gave notice of the deposit to the charterers, and claimed and received from them several monthly payments on account of freight. The owners became bankrupt, and on the return of the ship the adventure proved to be a losing one; and the charterers then first informed the bankers of their agreement with the owners that the speculation should be at their joint risk:-Held, that, although the equity of the charterers was originally prior to that of the bankers, their conduct had precluded them from insisting upon it; and that they were not entitled to an injunction to restrain the bankers from proceeding with an action to recover the whole of the remainder of the freight. Mangles v. Dixon, 542 CO-DEFENDANT. See EXAMINATION OF PARTIES. COLLEGE STATUTES. Where the statutes of a College required a certain number of the fellows to be in holy orders, and directed, that in case the number of clerical fellows became incomplete in consequence of a fellowship being vacated, the next fellow in point of seniority should take holy orders within one year, or à Collegii emolumentis recedat, it was held, in the case of a fellow who failed to comply with the statutes, by taking holy orders, that his fellowship had become altogether vacant, and that it was not sufficient for him to give up the emoluments while the number of clerical fellows remained incomplete. In re St. Catharine Hall, Cambridge, Ex parte Goodwin, 601 CORPORATION. 657 COMPENSATION. See LANDS CLAUSES CONSOLIDATION ACT, 1-3. VENDOR AND PURCHASER, 2. CONDITIONS OF SALE. See VENDOR AND PURCHASER, 2. CONTRACT. See CORPORATION, 3. NOTICE. CONTRIBUTORY. See JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES WINDING-UP ACT, I. COPYRIGHT. See INJUNCTION, 1, 4. CORPORATION. See JOINT-STOCK COMPANY. 1. A charity was founded some time in the 12th century, and was commonly called "The Master, Brethren, and Sisters of the Hospital of St. John the Baptist." In the time of Charles II, the mastership of the hospital and the lands &c. belonging to it were granted to the Corporation of Chester. The leases of the hospital lands had never been granted by the Corporation under their common seal; but, in the leases, the Corporation were described as being the Master of the Hospital, and the rents were reserved to the Master, Brethren, and Sisters. An information was filed against the Corporation of Chester and the parties who had been appointed trustees of the charity estates under the Municipal Corporations Reform Act, to ascertain the charity lands, and to have a scheme for the due regulation of the charity; to which information the Master, Brethren, and Sisters of the Hospital were not made parties as |