30 A that Superior Courts: Lord Chancellor.-Rolls.-V. C. Knight Bruce. that the next presentation should be sold. The The Lord Chancellor, after directing the petition to stand over for some decision in favour of the application, said, that the sections referred to did not empower him to make the order asked for, and, no authority being produced, refused the application tundub 90 Master to approve of a proper person as a receiver, to get in the outstanding debts of a partnership, which had been dissolved by the defendant under the articles, on the alleged ground of the plaintiff's neglecting to attend to the business, as attorneys and solicitors, with liberty to either party to propose himself, although it was sworn and not denied that the partnership was greatly indebted to the defendant, and that the outstanding assets were insufficient to pay the deol. of a receiver to get in the outstanding assets of THIS was an application for the appointment the partnership, which had been carried on by the defendant and the plaintiff as solicitors, but which had been dissolved on March 4 last, and for an injunction to restrain the defendant from interfering therewith. It appeared that the partnership was indebted to the defendant, and that the outstanding debts would be insufficient to pay him. Roupell and Elderton, for the plaintiff, in support, on the ground that the defendant had improperly excluded the plaintiff from the partnership. contrà, on the ground that the plaintiff had Walpole and Smythe, for the defendant, been properly excluded, under the powers of the articles of partnership, for neglecting to attend to the partnership business. ing regard to the imperfect state of the materials The Master of the Rolls observed, that hav before him, the partnership property should be protected, and it was therefore referred to the Master to approve of a proper person to be appointed as a receiver, with liberty to either party to propose himself; the rights of the parties to be determined at the hearing. others-Part heard. 1.-Oldfield v. Cobbett-Order nisi for supersedeas of writ of attachment refused. April 30, May 5.-Whicher v. Hume-Judgment as to costs. May 3, 5, 6.-Triston v. Hardy and others— Part heard. 6.-Palmer v. Great Northern Railway Company and others-Interim order for injunction. 662/6 Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce.se dist Blakeney v. Dufaur. May 1, 1851 PARTNERSHIP AS ATTORNEYS AND SOAn order was made for the winding up of ant LICITORS. DISSOLUTION REFERENCE company, the Master having reported onda to FOR APPOINTMENT OF RECEIVERMŢA --K02 woloud, a preliminary refercace as to the expediency 4n order was made for a reference to the |... of the winding up that it would be proper, si Superior Courts: V. C. Knight Bruse. 31 observing that it was proper, inasmuch as a large majority of the persons interested desired the appointment. ཏ། ་ In re Rugby, Warwick, and Worcester Railway MASTER'S JURISDICTION! Dodongl Held, that the Master has authority under the 11 & 12 Vict. c. 45, to make calls for the costs of winding-up, &c. of a company, on the contributories and semble, a call of 4s, was allowed, it not being objected to as improper, although the bill of costs had not been taxed. 12 JE ment of costs. THIS was a petition to wind up this company under the 11 & 12 Vict. c. 45, and the 12 & 13 Vict. c. 108, a preliminary reference to Master Kindersley as to the expediency of winding up its affairs having been reported on in favour of the order now sought. It appeared that no advertisement of the preliminary order of reference had been inserted under the 12 & 13 Vict. e. 108, s. 16, which provides, "That it shall be lawful for the Master, in such cases as he thinks fit, to dispense with any advertisements required by the said act to be made of any call or for any other pro- the decision of the Master, to whom the matter THIS was a petition by way of appeal from ceedings by or before the Master: provided of the winding up of this company had been that the said Master shall not dispense with referred, making a call of 4s. per share for paythe advertisement of an intended call or other proceeding until he is satisfied that notice has Russell and Field, for the appellant, Mr. been given to each of the several contributories intended to be included in such call or Preece, referred to the 11 & 12 Vict. c. 45, s. affected by such proceeding, that it is intended the whole of the assets of such company shall 83, which provides, that "at any time before to include him therein or affect him thereby; have been collected or converted, and if the as and that, notwithstanding anything in the said sets remaining to be collected or converted act contained, no proceedings in any action by shall not be capable of being immediately rea creditor shall be stayed by reason that analized, although such assets may not appear to advertisement has not been published under be insufficient, and also, after the assets of the the said act requiring creditors to come in and company shall have been wholly exhausted, it' prove their debts and demands before the shall be lawful for the Master from time to time? Master." to make calls on the contributories or on such All the directors had been summoned. individual contributories or classes of contribu Smythe in support; Bagshawe, for the secretories as he may think proper, (but so far only tary of the company, did not oppose. The Vice-Chancellor made the order, the liable at law or in equity to pay the same, as as such contributories respectively shall be Master being satisfied on the question of the necessity for advertisements. In re Hough's Estate, April 26, 1851. NEW TRUSTEES.-PETITION FOR APPOINT MENT OF. MAJORITY OF CESTUI QUE TRUSTS.-ADMINISTRATION CLAIM. The usual order of reference was made for the appointment of new trustees on petition presented by 30 of the persons (who were the majority) entitled to the trust funds, notwithstanding a a claim was filed under which the property, it was alleged by some of the other parties, could be administered without such appointment. Freeling appeared in support of this petition which was presented by 30 persons, the great nephews and nieces of their testator entitled to the estate, which was devised to trustees on trust for his great nephews and nieces, for the appointment of new trustees.k Swinburne, on behalf of certain parties also interested, on the ground that a claim, had been filed whereby the estate could be administered without the appointment of trustees, and that the petition should stand over until the hearing of the claim.ger paisod dierlé oil), win qprog The Vice Chancellor, however, directed a reference for the appointment of new trustees, well for raising such amount as may be neces sary to pay the debts or liabilities or any of the debts or liabilities of such company, or any part thereof, or the costs, charges, and expenses of winding up the same," &c., and s. 103, that and the costs of proving debts and of trying "the general costs of winding up the estate, issues, and of all other matters in which credi tors, or any particular contributories or classes of contributories or alleged contributories of such company shall be interested, shall be in the discretion of the Master, and shall be paid either out of the general estate of such company, 1 or out of any portion of the general estate, or shall be debited or credited to any individual contributories or classes of contributories, or shall be subject to such set off as the Master shall from time to time direct." The Vice-Chancellor, without callings on Swanston and W. T. S. Daniel, for the respond M ents, contrà, held, that the Master had jurisdiction to make the order, although there was no taxation, the improper, or the parties call was on whom the to be made not liable. Mul pol -03 ЦИЛ РУЗИЯОТТА ЗА ЧЕНИЯЗИТЯАЧ April 30 Exparte Higginson, in re Higgin son- -Appeal dismissed from Mr. Commissioner Ludlow. May 3. In re Trusts of Smythe's Settlement 32 Superior Courts: V. CAK. Bruce.-V.C. Ld. Cranworth.-V. C. Turner.-Queen's Bench. -Order under 13 & 14 Vict. c. 60, s. 35, discharged so far as directing right to stock should be exercised by new trustees in obtaiuing a transfer, and declaration that right to call for transfer should be vested in such new a The Vice-Chancellor said, that as the shares had been allotted to the appellant as provisional committee-man, and had been accepted without repudiating that character, the case was not distinguishable from that of Upfill's, and the motion must be refused with costs. April 30-Tanner v. Sibley-Cur. ad. vult. 30.-In re Bliss's Trustees-Petition dismissed with costs. May 1.-In re Imperial Bank of England, exparte Wooley-Appeal dismissed from Master excluding respondent's name from list of contributories.-Costs out of estate. - 1.-In re Same, exparte Aspinall-The 2.-In re Direct Oxford, Reading, and Brighton Railway Company, exparte Upfill 5.-In re Same, exparte Thorn-The like. 5.-In re Same, exparte Hunter-Motion refused, with costs, to strike out name from list of contributories. On appeal from, and affirming with costs, the decision of the Master, one N. was held liable as a contributory, to whom the secretary of the company had written as a provisional committee-man asking him whether he would take 100 shares which the manag-nature of exceptions allowed to finding of the 6.-Digby v. Boycott-Petition in the ing directors had agreed should be the Master as to completion of investment of trust amount of shares allotted to each pro- funds. visional committee-man, and N. having written back accepting the allotment, but not describing himself as a provisional committee-man, and the secretary having written with the formal allotment of the shares,-notwithstanding his name had not been published in the prospectus as a provisional committee-man. 3, 5.-Williams v. Shrewsbury and Birmingham Railway Company and others-Motion for injunction refused with costs. THIS WAS a motion on appeal from the Master including the name of the appellant on Vice-Chancellor Turner. ed without costs. May 1-Squire v. Ford and others-Judgment in favour of plaintiff's claim of priority over the other creditors. 3, 5, 6.- North Staffordshire Railway Company v. Whieldon-Bill dismissed with Court of Queen's Bench: Clements v. Francham. April 24, 1851. ACTION FOR FALSE IMPRISONMENT.-Judg MENT BY DEFAULT. EVIDENCE.-MALICE. the list of contributories for 100 shares in this costs. : Roxburgh in support, on the ground that Mr. Nicolay had not paid any deposit, nor was there any proof of his name having appeared in the prospectuses, and also that the case was distinguishable from Upfill's case, (2 H. of L. 674,) the letter of acceptance being there signed "P. C." Bethell and Glasse, for the official manager, were not called on. the On the trial of a writ of inquiry in an action for false imprisonment, it appeared that the plaintiff had been taken in custody at D. by two policemen in uniform, and taken to B. from whence he was delivered at Bury gaol by the defendant, the superintendent of police for the D. district, and detained there for 36 weeks, until released upon detaining creditor being paid. The presiding judge having directed the jury that there was no evidence to connect the defendant with the arrest at D., or of malice, and that the defendant, by letting judgment go by default, only admitted the least possible amount of imprisonment sufficient to support the declaration: Held, on motion Superior Courts: Queen's Bench.-Q. B. Practice Court. Pigott in support. 33 April 30.-Regina v. Dean and Chapter of Rochester-Judgment for defendants. for a new trial on the ground of misdirec- | the plaintiff having obtained a verdict for 357., tion, the plaintiff having only obtained 20s. this motion was made. damages, no misdirection. THIS action was brought for false imprison-Court was right in refusing to hear anybody The Court said, that the judge of the County ment against the superintendent of police for but those who were parties to the suit, and that the Santon Downham district, in Suffolk, and if the certiorari had been properly lodged, the the defendant having suffered judgment to go by default, the writ of inquiry was executed judge was guilty of contempt in proceeding, or before Erle, J., at the last assizes for the if not, that the remedy was against the bailiff, and refused the rule accordingly. county. It appeared that the plaintiff was on a visit to his brother-in-law at Santon Downham, and was seized by two policemen in uniform, handcuffed, and taken to Brandon, and that he was delivered by the defendant, the same evening, at Bury gaol, and remained there for 36 weeks until he was liberated by payment of 101. by a charitable association to the detaining creditor. On the trial, Mr. Justice Erle having told the jury that there was no evidence to connect the defendant with the arrest at Santon Downham, that there was no evidence of malice, and that it was only by letting judgment go by default the least possible period of imprisonment could be admitted to support the declaration, and a verdict for 20s. damages having been returned for the plaintiff. Keane now moved for a rule nisi to set aside the verdict and for a new trial on the ground of misdirection, and that the delivery at Bury gaol was evidence of the defendant's connexion with the arrest, that the plaintiff was not bound to show malice, and that if the defendant intended to rely, in mitigation of damages, on any subsequent detainer, he should have proved it, and that as he had not done so, the plaintiff was entitled to substantial damages. The Court held, there had been no misdirection, and refused the rule. Bond v. Manning. April 28, 1851. COUNTY COURTS.—PROHIBITION.—REPLE- A writ of prohibition to the judge of a County THIS was a motion for a writ of prohibition to the Judge of the Bloomsbury County Court against further proceedings in this plaint, which was in replevin against the bailiff of a Mr. Saunders, who was sworn in the affidavits to be colluding with the plaintiff, and who had obtained a certiorari on behalf of Saunders to remove the case into the Superior Courts, but, upon application being made to fix the amount of bail had waived his certiorari. The judge having declined, on the application of Saunders to be heard in the plaint, to hear him as he was not a party to the suit, and 30.-Regina v. London and North Western Railway Company-Cur. ad. vult. 30.-Doe dem. Westbrook v. Johnson—. Rule enlarged. May 1.-Sherlock v. Fullager-Rule refused for new trial. for new trial on the ground of misdirection. refused for new trial. 1.-Doe dem. Tatham v. Calamore-Rule 1. Doe dem. Lord Ashburnham v. Michael-Rule nisi for new trial. 1.-Doe dem. Eaton v. Swansea Waterworks Company-Rule nisi for new trial. for new trial. fused for new trial on the ground of misdirec- tion. -- 2.-Sunderland Marine Insurance Comfirmed of the Court of Common Pleas of the pany v. Kearney and another-Judgment afCounty Palatine of Durham. 3.-Regina v. Bills-Rule absolute to quash rate for repair of sea walls. - Rule absolute 3. Regina v. Welch to quash conviction under registration of Designs' Act. 5.-Doe dem. Shallcross v. Palmer-Rule discharged to enter verdict for lessor of plaintiff. 5.-Exparte W. H. Barber-Motion for Cur. ad. vult. rule nisi. 5.-Regina v. Hewitt and others-Rule refused to set aside side-bar rule for taxation of costs herein. Queen's Bench Practice Court. 30.-Cox v. Pritchard-Rule discharged with costs for discharge of defendant out of custody. 30. Regina v. York, Newcastle, and Berwick Railway Company-Rule nisi for mandamus on defendants to make and complete certain railways. 30.-Regina v. Martin and others-Bail put in indictment. May 1.-Regina v. Poor Law Guardians of St. Martin's-in-the-Fields-Rule nisi for mandamus to elect clerk to board. 2.-Regina v. Ingham-Rule nisi on police magistrate to hear information under Metropolitan Paving Act, 3.-Regina v. West-Rule nisi for certi 34 Superior Courts: QB Practice Court.-Common Fleas --Exchequer. orari to bring up conviction under Registration of Designs' Act, Regina v 2 v. Scott Rule nist for criminal information for libekzony BEAT, 77 5.-Regina Chapman Rule nisi for criminal information for libel. 6. Doe dem. Noble V Roe-Rule nisi for judgment against causal ejector. Court of Comman Pleas,\ ms shoum tant bad od 111851nta edi mes barg798 RESOLU footing in their new house, and that the com*mittee be empowered to raise this sum on May 1 White. Garden and others Rule discharged on leave reserved to enter verdict for defendants, me 1.-Abley v. Dale-Cur. ad. vult. 2. Earl of Clarendon and others' v. Parish of St. James', Westminster-On special case from Middlesex Sessions, the "London Library" held liable to be rated, and not exempt under the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 36. 5.-Bate v. Parkinson and another-Rule discharged to set aside nonsuit and enter ver dict for plaintiff.testngeda 5.-Boden v. French and others-Rule discharged to set aside nonsuit and for new trial. Toulmin v. Johnson. April 23, 1851.349 BILL OF LADING.—INTERPLEADER ISSUE. -INSOLVENCY OF TRANSFEREE. Held, on motion for, and refusing on the ground of misdirection, a rule for a new trial of an issue, under the Interpleader Act, that the transfer of bills of lading from an insolvent is not invalidated by the mere fact of suspicion on behalf of the transferee of such insolvency, that being insufficient to indicate mala fides; and that the intention of the insolvent alone, without that of the transferee, to defraud the consignor of the goods, is also insufficient to iset such transfer aside; and semble, the [transferee should be shown to have known 5H- & of the insolvency the guarantee of the society in the manner - most advantageous to the society, and that 10g this meeting further pledges itself to meet heartily the views of the committee in subscribing to the proposed debentures." Ar a general meeting of the members of the Colonial Club, of which the plaintiff and de--91 fendant were members, held on June 1, 1842, THIS was an issue under the Interpleader it was resolved, that "a loan of 4,000l. is né Act, as to whether the plaintiffs, merchants at cessary to free the society from outstanding Mobile and New Orleans in America, were enliabilities and place the establishment of the titled to the possession of 200 bales of cotton society upon a suitable footing in their new which had been sent by them to their agent, house, and that the committee. benempowered named Barber, at Liverpool, and which had to raise this sum on the guarantee of the so- been sold before their arrival to one Chadwick, ciety in the manner most advantageous to the to be paid for by drafts at 60 days, and the society, and that this meeting further pledges bills of lading handed over to him. Chadwick, itself to meet heartily the views of the com-on Oct. 4, and before the arrival of the cotton, mittee in subscribing to the proposed deben- endorsed of lading to the defendant, tures." The plaintiff accordingly Borrowed and having become bankrupt, the plaintiffs' the sum from the Commercial Bank of and having repaid the loan bron it took possession of the cotton on their above share. behalf. the trial before Mr. Baron Platt, against the defendant, who was present at the at the last Liverpool Assizes, the question left to recover the amount of his to the jury was, whether they believed the dehaving ct for the de- dorsed, any suspicion of the solvency of Chadthe trial before fendant had, at the time of the hills being inJervis, L. C. J., returned a fendant on the ground he had not not authorised wick; and in answer to questions, told the jury was made for age his credit, this motion that suspicion alone of Chadwick's insolvency mib, sa? INT a new trial. the committee to was insufficient evidence of mala fides, and that ground that an intention to cheat the consignor on the part in suppot,ve construed the of Chadwick alone was also insufficient to de judge should effect of the resolution, and not left it to the direction, .00 April 30 Dewest Riley-Rale nision leave reserved to enter nonsuitsaso to noisis feat the transaction, and added that it was nes cessary for the plaintiff to make out affirmal tively that the defendant must have known of Chadwick's insolvency? The defendant obs tained a verdict, and this motion was made för rule is for a new trial on the ground of misdirection.as a gold in a to |