UNITED KINGDOM LIFE ASSUR ANCE COMPANY, 8, Waterloo-place, Pall-mall, London; 97, George-street, Edinburgh; 12, St. Vincent'splace, Glasgow. DIRECTORS. Samuel Anderson, Esq. Hamilton Blair Avarne, Esq. E. Lennox Boyd, Esq. Resident. Charles Downes, Esq. JAMES STUART, Esq. Chairman. HANANEL DE CASTRO, Deputy Chairman. Charles Graham, Esq. F. C. Maitland, Esq. William Railton, Esq. John Ritchie, Esq. F. H. Thomson, Esq. This Company, established by Act of Parliament in 1834, affords the most perfect security in a large paid-up capital, and in the great success which has attended it since its commencement, its annual income being upwards of 84,0001. In 1841 the Company added a bonus of 21. per cent. per annum on the sum insured to all Policies of the Participating Class from the time they were effected. The bonus added to policies from March, 1834, to the 31st of December, 1840, is as follows: 5,000 Sum added to Policy. £683 6 8 600 0 0 400 0 0 200 0 0 4 yrs. 5,000 2 yrs. The premiums, nevertheless, are on the most moderate scale, and only one-half need be paid for the first five years, where the insurance is for life. Parties wishing to secure the benefit of the next division of profits, in 1848, should make immediate application. Loans made on Policies to the extent of half the sum to be assured, on security approved by the Directors of the Company. No entrance-money or charge, except the policy-stamp. Every information will be afforded on application to the Resident Director, E. LENNOX BOYD, Esq. of No. 8, Waterloo-place, Pall-mall, London. SOLICIT ASSURANCE SOCIETY, 57, Chancery-lane, London. This Society transacts all the usual business of Life As surance. Tables of Premiums have been prepared expressly for this Office, by F. G. P. NEISON, Esq. F.L.S., calculated on the nearest approximation to the real law of mortality. These Tables afford peculiar encouragement to the assurance of young lives. They embrace participating and nonparticipating scales. In the participating class, the Assured will be entitled to have four-fifths of the profits divided amongst them periodically, either by way of addition to the amount assured, or in diminution of premium, as the parties may elect. No deduction will be made from such profits for interest of capital. or for a guarantee fund. The Premiums may be paid half-yearly or annually, or by MEDICAL, INVALID, & GENERAL LIFE office, 25, Pall Mall, London, and 22, Nassau Street, Dublin. Subscribed Capital £500,000. ONDON and PROVINCIAL LAW THIS Od possesses tables formed on a scientific OFFICE WAS ESTABLISHED Lo ASSURANCE SOCIETY, No. 32, New Bridge-street, Blackfriars, London. Completely Registered, pursuant to 7 & 8 Vict. cap. 110. TRUSTEES. The Honorable Anthony John Ashley. Henry Hughes, esq. Clement's-inn. Michael Smith Parnther, esq. Fenchurch-street. Edward Rowland Pickering, esq. Lincoln's-inn. Francis Turner, esq. Lincoln's-inn. DIRECTORS. Addams, Richard, esq. Doctors'-commons. 1 Jay, Samuel, esq. Lincoln's-inn. Jones, John Oliver, esq. John-street, Bedford-row. Lake, Henry, esq. Lincoln's-inn. Law, Henry Shephard. esq. Bush-lane. Lefroy, George Bentinck, esq. Piccadilly. H. D. Warter, esq. Carey-street, Lincoln's-inn, Robert Curling, esq. Frederick's-place, Old Jewry. ACTUARY.-Alexander Glen Finlaison, esq. BANKERS. Bank of England. SECRETARY.-John Knowles, esq. Four-fifths of the profits divided amongst the assured on the participating scale, by way of bonus, or in reduction of premiums. The lowest rates of premium consistent with security to the assured. The Directors may renew Policies becoming void from the lives assured going without permission out of Europe. Ladies, and parties in the country, whose lives may be proposed for assurance, not required to appear before the Board. All the usual advantages given by other Assurance Societies, will be found at this office, and every variety of proposal for assurance, and for payment of premiums, entertained. Annuities granted. basis for the assurance of diseased lives. The urgent necessity for such an institution may be estimated by the fact that two-thirds of the population are not assurable as healthy lives, and that about one in five of the applicants to other offices is declined on examination. And that during the period of five years, as shewn at the Annual General Meeting of the Proprietors in November last, upwards of 2,000 proposals had been made to the Society, covering Assurances to above One Million. It is the only Company possessing tabulated rates of premium for Disease deduced from extensive data. HEALTHY LIVES, both at Home and in Foreign Climates, are assured with as much facility and at lower rates than at most other offices; and a capital of HALF-A-MILLION sterling, fully subscribed, affords a complete guarantee for the fulfilment of the Company's engagements. F. G. P. NEISON, Actuary. N.B. Applications for Agencies to be made to the Actuary. at the Ensuing Election : A MANUAL FOR THE ELECTIONS. Terrorating the Reform Act and all the recent Statutes, with the Cases decided on Appeal to the Common Pleas to the present time-with Introduction and Notes, and a Copious Index. To this Edition are added-1. Practical Instructions to Agents for conducting Elections in Counties and Boroughs, with Forms, &c. 2. Practical Instructions to Returning Officers, with Forms. By EDWARD W. COX, Esq. Barrister-at-Law. Price 6s. 6d. boards, 8s. 6d. bound, and 98. 6d. interleaved. BOOKS AND FORMS. I. COUNTIES, CITIES, AND Boroughs. No. 1. CANVASS BOOKS, bound, with India Rubber backs, according to size, 6s. 75. 85. 9s. and 10s. (Counties and Boroughs.) No. 2. COMMIttee RegisteR BOOKS, ledger size, ruled and bound: 1. Larger size for Central Committees, 21. 12s. 6d. (Counties and Boroughs). Smaller, for District Committees, 21. (Counties and Boroughs). Central Committee, in sheets-ruled, price 4s. per quire, No. 3. Return of DAILY CANVASS by the District to the (Counties and Boroughs). No. 4. INSPECTORS' POLL Books, price 88. 10s. 11s. and 128. each, according to size, (Counties and Boroughs). No. 5. CHECK CLERKS' BOOKS, ruled (for Counties, twenty on a leaf, price 4s, each; for Boroughs, ten on a leaf, price 4s. each). No. 6. POLLS RETURN BOOKS, for keeping a regular account of the state of the Poll, 3s. each, (Counties and Beroughs). No. 7. ACCOUNT BOOKS, for Committees, bound 10s., wiNo. 8. COMMITTEE with patent lock, 258. No. 8. COMMITTEE MINUTE Books, quarto, bound 10., No. 9. Lists for OUT VOTERS, 4s. per quire. II. FOR UNDER SHERIFFS AND RETURNING OFFICERS. Instructions for conducting the Election, with forms of the proceedings to be observed, boards 2s. 6d. bound 48. No. 10. POLL BOOKS, 8s. 9s. and 10s. each, according to size. No. 1. BRIBERY OATH on sheets, 4s. per quire. No. 12. OATH of IDENTITY, and that Voter has not polled before, on sheets, 4s. per quire. No. 13. Instructions by Returning Officer to Poll Clerks are on each sheet (copyright), 5s. per quire. N.B. The above Books and Forms are copyright. The name of the County, City, or Borough will be printed in the forms with additional charge, if not less than a week's notice be given. Orders should state as nearly as possible the number of Electors in the place for which the above Books and Forms are required, that the size of the books may be proportioned accordingly; and they should be sent at the earliest moment BRITANNIA LIFE ASSURANCE COM-to preble disappear quantities be received at the latest Princes-street, Bank, London. Empowered by Special Act of Parliament, 4 Vict. cap. 9. ADVANTAGES OF THIS INSTITUTION. MUTUAL ASSURANCE BRANCH. Complete Security afforded to the Assured by means of an ample subscribed capital, and the large fund accumulated from the premiums on upwards of 6,000 Policies. Half the amount only of the annual premium required during the first five years, the remaining half premiums being paid out of the profits, which, after five years, will be annually divided among the Assured. PROPRIETARY BRANCH. The lowest rates consistent with security to the Assured. An increasing scale of premiums peculiarly adapted to cases where assurances are effected for the purpose of securing Loans or Dehts. Half-credit rates of Premium, whereby credit is given for half the amount of premium for seven years, to be then paid off, or remain a charge upon the policy at the option of the holder. EXTRACTS FROM THE TABLES. Annual Premiums required for an Assurance of 1001. for the Whole Term of Life. avoidable if moment. LAW TIMES Office, 29, Essex-street. REAMLESS NIGHTS.-How refreshing digestion! What a boon! but what a rarity! All the wealth in the world cannot buy it, and yet how simple it is to sefor it but ourselves? Physic is one evil to cure another, cure it. How fearful is illness, and who have we to blame but caution keeps off more fires than water quenches. Reader, if you value the desiderata of good health in the day, and tranquil repose at night, together with mental serenity at all times, or should lack firmness of nerve or purpose, or suffer from the sorrows of an afflicted body, seek how to obtain the former, and remove the lattter, in Dr. WHAT to EAT, DRINK, and AVOID, and as companion, Culverwell's little Memoirs, called HOW to LIVE; or 1s. 6d. in stamps). They recommend no nostrum, pill, or HOW to be HAPPY (the price is 1s. each; if by post, balm, but render every possessor master or mistress of his or her own case. They tell home truths, and detail facts that may astound, but which are worthy of recognition; and they furthermore unmystify the laws of life, health, and happiness, and how to live happy and contentedly is rendered clear and open to the humblest intelligence. To be had of Sherwood, 23, Paternoster-row; Carvalho, 147, Fleet-street; Mann, 39, Cornhill; Nalson, 457, West Strand; and all Booksellers; or direct from the author, 10, Argyll-place, Regent-street; who can be personally conferred with daily till four, and in the evenings till nine. GENUINE CORK WHISKY. IT is an admitted fact that there is no whisky ma nufactured to equal that of Cork for its exquisitely sweet and mild flavour; and it is equally undeniable that that spirit could not hitherto be had in London, but in its place an article has been sold, so unpalatable as to cause almost a general distaste for Irish whisky. In order to supply this want, J. STEPHENS has opened the extensive vaults, No. 141, Fleet-street, for the sale of this delicious spirit, which he now offers to the trade and the public, for cash, at prices so advantageous as must, after a single trial, secure a continuance of their orders. The public can be supplied with this pure spirit, of great age and strength, in quantities of two gallons, at 18s. per gallon. Stamped sample bottles, 3s. 4d, and 1s. 7d." Gate entrance, 141, Fleet street, and through Wine Office-court. THOMAS FORSTER'S PATENT WATER. SIR JAMES MURRAY'S FLUID MAGNESIA. PROOF CLOTHING, for Sea Voyages, Steam Trips, Land Travelling and Emigration.-T. FORSTER has patented a material which water cannot be forced through, and is so supple that it will not Gloves, Bags, Boots, Gun and Sword Cases, Fishing Boots, &c.; and crack. It is made into Coats, Capes, Caps, Jackets, Trousers, Gaiters, being impervious, the person, however exposed to weather on the sea or in the bush, is entirely and permanently protected.-Sold by his Agent, GEORGE TRIMBEY, 39, Queen-street, Cheapside, London. HER -Prepared under the immediate care of the Inventor, and established for upwards of thirty years by the Profession, for removing BILE, ACIDITIES, and INDIGESTION, restoring APPETITE, preserving a moderate state of the bowels, and dissolving uric acid in GRAVEL and GOUT; also as an easy remedy for SEA SICKNESS, and for the febrile affection incident to childhood it is invaluable.On the value of Magnesia as a remedial agent it is unnecessary to enlarge; but the Fluid preparation of Sir James Murray is now the most valued by the Profession, as it entirely avoids the possibility of those dangerous concretions usually resulting from the use of the article in powder, and in the overdosed liquids of detected Sold by the sole consignee, Mr. BAILEY, of North-street, Wolver Agents, throughout the British Empire, in bottles, Is., 2s. 6d., 3s. 6d. hampton; and by all wholesale and retall Druggists and Medicine 5s. 6d., 11s. and 21s. each. PATENT for imitators. PRATT'S TRAVELLING COMPENDIUM. It has four comProposals for Loans on Life Interests, or other approved partments for packing clothes separately without injury, and an exCan only be purchased at 123, New Bondpanding bag besides. security, entertained. street, and 19, Cockspur-street, where also can be seen an assemblage of military bedsteads, portable furniture, and every requisite for an outfit, or the overland journey, of superior mauufacture, and newest contrivances, which can be supplied on the shortest notice from PRATT'S trunk and military outfit warehouse. The usual commission allowed. Prospectuses, &c. may be had at the Office, or will be forwarded on application to the Secretary. *. The Acidulated Syrup in Bottles, 2s. each. N.B.-Be sure to ask for "Sir James Murray's Preparation," and to see that his name is stamped on each label in green ink, as follows: James Murray, Physician to the Lord-Lieutenant." Lord Chancellor's Court ......... Vice-Chancellor of England's Court Vice-Chancellor Wigram's Court.......................... Court of Common Pleas Court of Exchequer Bail Court.. Nisi Prius Cases. . . • .• • • • • • • · Circuit Reports EGISLATOR-Summary .... 165 166 167 178 ..... 180 181 182 183 Bills in Progress.. Legislation on Private Bills. MAGISTRATE-Summary.. LAWYER-Summary......... COUNTY COURTS Leading Articles: Notes on County Courts Practice.. 183 shire-Gloucestershire Correspondence 183 184 185 A SPROMOTIONS, APPOINTMENTS, &c.. COURT PAPERS...... EGAL INTELLIGENCE PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS CORRESPONDENCE Unlicensed Lawyers Nothing could be more capricious than such a selection. The trustees might select funds which would now produce the requisite income, and hereafter be reduced to half that amount, or they might select funds not producing income at present which might hereafter produce a considerable income, and so give her much more than 1,500l. a year. The LORD CHANCELLOR.-If the power given to would have been no room for the appellant's argurities, had preceded the gift of the annuity, there the trustees to call in and invest, and to sell the secument. dividends, and annual produce hereinbefore diRomilly and Tennant, for the plaintiff, the widow.Page rected to be paid to her." In a subsequent part of the will there was the following clause: "I do hereby expressly authorise and empower my said Contended that the gift to the widow was not a spe168 trustees, and the trustees and trustee for the time cific legacy, and that it could not be made such by the 168 being of this my will, or the majority of them re- selection and appropriation of securities by the trus169 siding in England, at their own discretion, to permit tees. The fallacy of the appellants' case consisted in 173 the whole or any part of my personal property to re-assuming that funds, then producing a certain amount 175 main and continue on such securities as the same of interest, were to be selected. 178 may happen to be invested upon at the time of my 179 decease, so long as they shall see fit, without being in 180 any way responsible for so doing. Nevertheless, I 180 do hereby fully authorise and empower my said trus. tees, and the trustees and trustee for the time being of this my will, or the majority of them residing in England, to sell and absolutely dispose of, or convert into money, such part or parts of my personal estate as do After such part or parts of my personal estate and effects not consist of money, and get in and recover and receive when in their discretion they shall think fit." the testator's death, the widow filed the bill in this 185 suit in March 1845, claiming an annuity of 1,500l. 186 and to have so much of the personal estate sold and 186 invested in Three per Cent. Consols, as would produce that yearly sum; and Vice-Chancellor Wigram held that she was entitled to have such an investment made. Against that decree which declared, "that plaintiff was entitled to have so much of the personal according to the true construction of the will, the estate of the said testator invested in Bank Three per Cent. Annuities as should be sufficient to produce a They were six clear income of 1,500l. per annum." 189 trustees and executors appointed, and only one of 190 them, Harris Prendergast, at first proved the will; ..190 afterwards the testator's eldest son, Charles George Prendergast, came to England, and being one of the trustees and executors named, also proved the will. H. Prendergast had declined to select the funds to be appropriated to answer the widow's annuity; and the Court held that the nature of the will was such as to render conversion necessary, and that the only investment the Court could adopt was Three per Cents. Against that decree the testator's children, by the first marriage, who were with the other children residuary legatees, appealed. ..... 187 Mortgage Transfer Stamp Se Country Solicitors' Club Metropolitan and Provincial Law Association.... BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, AND DEATHS ..... PROPERTY JOURNAL Hughes's Practice of Sales (continued) GAZETTES ADVERTISEMENTS. THE REPORTS. Equity Courts. ... 188 188 188 PRENDERGAST v. LUSHINGTON. Conversion-Foreign securities-Appropriation to answer annuity-Construction. Where a testator whose property consisted of various foreign securities, directed his trustees to "select, appropriate, and set apart such part of his personal estate" as should produce a certain annual sum, and to pay that sum by half yearly payments to his wife; it was held that the widow was entitled to have so much of the personal estate converted into Three per Cent. stock, as would answer the annuity. Bethell and Hetherington for the appellants. A case relied on by the plaintiff before the Vice-Chancellor was Cole v. Wade, 16 Vesey 27, to shew that the Court would not exercise a personal discretion confided to the trustees. Here the direction was year to that the trustees should select certain funds out of a given number of funds, which implies no personal confidence, and may well be done by the Court. It was discretion to determine by which funds the most seonly an act of common prudence, or administrative cure income could be obtained. The Master or any prudent man might execute that trust. There is a distinction between a power to be executed by any person and a particular person. (Walker v. Walker, 5 Madd. 424.) [The LORD CHANCELLOR.-Suppose G. L. Prendergast.-The testator in this cause died possessed of a very considerable personal estate, most of which was, at the time of his death, invested foreign funds, producing 20 per cent. should be those hazardous securities set apart? Are the trusin foreign securities, consisting in part of American appropriated, is the widow to be subject to have bonds, and of various European securities, paying interest, and in part of bonds and securities, both tees to appropriate such funds, and then to sell them American and European, on which at present no in-under the general power of conversion given to the terest is paid. The family consisted of several chil-trustees, and the widow to have only the interest of dren by a first marriage, and widow and children by the converted sum? Is it not the duty of the trustees, the second marriage. By his will the testator made, not merely for the widow, but for the residuary gives to the trustees a power of conversion geneamongst others, the following bequest: "I give and legatees, to secure the funds by converting the estate devise to my trustees, hereinafter named, so much of into English securities?] The latter clause, which my personal estate and effects as, at the time of my rally, must be read in subordination to the first either to take the increase or be subject to the dedecease, shall produce the clear annual income of 1,500l.; and I direct that the same shall be se- clause, which expressly provides that the wife is lected and appropriated and set apart so soon as conthe widow; she takes nothing except veniently may be after my decease, by my said trustees, crease of the income of the selected funds. There or the trustees or trustee for the time being, or the was no absolute gift of an annuity of 1,500l. a majority of them residing in England, in their unfunds are to remain on these doubtful securities? controlled discretion. And I direct that my said through the medium of the gift to the trustees. trustees, or the trustee for the time being under this The LORD CHANCELLOR.-Do you mean these my will, do and shall stand and be possessed of the In proportion as the interest is large, the capital is in personal estate and effects so to be appropriated and estate the most secure funds. [The LORD CHANset apart, upon trust to pay the interest, dividends, hazard. What the testator wanted was to secure the and annual produce, by equal half-yearly payments, annuity.] His object was to select from his personal unto my said dear wife, during her life, if she shall 50 CELLOR.-They are not required to set apart to prolong continue my widow, the first of the said half-yearly duce an income of 1,500l. property which rests on an verted. The question is, to what extent they were to payments to be made at the end of six months from insecure foundation. All the estate must be conthe day of my death; and from and after the decease or second marriage of my said wife, I direct that the exercise the power to call in those funds.] The whole personal estate and effects which shall be so appro- scheme of the will shews that he intended his then priated and set apart, or the stocks, funds, or securities in or upon which the same shall then be laid existing estate to be selected from, and the general been appropriated. [The LORD CHANCELLOR. out or invested, shall sink into and become part of power of conversion applies to that which had not long as she lives in the same state. Your construcmy residuary estate. And I direct that in case the The widow might claim to have funds retained so yearly interest, dividends, and annual produce of as is not set apart. That is a strong construction. Are the personal estate and effects so to be appro- tion implies that the power to convert means so much priated and set apart as aforesaid, or the stocks, funds, or securities in or upon which the same shall or may at any time or times hereafter be laid these securities which the trustees would be justified out or invested, shall, from any cause whatever, be in retaining?] Where property is specifically exincreased or reduced in amount during the time, the pressed, it is taken out of the general clauses. same are hereby directed to be paid to my said wife, (Pickering v. Pickering, 2 Beav. 31; Howe v. Lord then, and in such case, my said wife shall be entitled Dartmouth, 7 Ves. 137.) The general rule of this to have and receive such increased or reduced in- Court yields to the expressed intention of the testerest, dividends, and annual produce, as the case may be, in lieu and satisfaction of the interest, VOL. IX. No. 217. tator. James Parker and C. Roupell, for H. Prendergast, declined to act, except under the direction of Romilly. That power overrides the whole will. The testator talks of the securities in which the funds shall then be invested, and plainly contemplates giving his trustees power to change the securities, and that is confirmed by the terms of the residuary bequest to all his children. If this could be made a specific to allow the securities to remain, or to call them in, legacy by selection, how could he permit the trustees when he had said that they should not call them in? The Court will not allow a speculation such as that now sought to be continued. In fact, if all these foreign securities had been converted and invested at the testator's death, they might have been since repurchased, leaving a considerable balance in the funds. According to the state of the record, there is only one trustee, who has refused to act, and the appellants Tinney and McNaughten for the children of the cannot now at the bar say there are two trustees. second marriage. Bethell in reply. The LORD CHANCELLOR.-According to your construction, the appropriation must consist of of the testator's death. securities producing the required income at the time Bethell.-The Court is not called upon to construe If this is a trust in the the will by an extreme case. trustees to select from the testator's securities, the is no reason for departing from the strict meaning of Court is equally bound to execute the trust. There answer an annuity, had been lost sight of in the the testator's words. The difference between the ownership of existing property and an investment to to be made so by selection. The testator contemdecree. The subject of the gift is certain, that it is plated the possibility of the income derived from the foreign securities he had directed to be appropriated increasing or diminishing: it was not contingent either way. The annuitant was not entitled to have that contingency converted into a certainty at the expense of the other legatees. The legatees take only by the death, sink into the residuary estate. direction that what is set apart for them shall, on her The LORD CHANCELLOR.-If a specific trust had been created in terms, the Court would have no right to alter it more than a trustee; but if the Court has to execute a gift, it will only execute it in the usual Bethell.-The testator has not given 1,500l. a year way. The Court selects the Three per Cents. because rest of this estate. that kind of security is least likely to be altered. investment in the Three per Cents. would protect the out of his estate. An The LORD CHANCELLOR.-They do not contend annuity by investment in some permanent fund. The that he has. They say that there being no approBethell.-It would ruin the family to force a sale priation, the Court will secure the payment of the testator meant to protect his estate against any fluctuation in the appropriated fund. of these securities. The LORD CHANCELLOR.-The question is, whehave thought all through the discussion that it is not ther continuing to hold them would not be ruinous. I for the benefit of any party that these investments should be continued. They are of low price because they are considered insecure. JUDGMENT. Jan. 21.-The LORD CHANCELLOR, having read the clause in the will directing the appropriation, But the Court will not adopt such a construction where the intention is not clear. In the present case it is very doubtful whether that was the real intention of the testator. There is a clause in the will giving to the trustees a discretionary power of changing the investments of the funds, which affords a very strong argument against any specific appropriation, such as that for which the appellants have contended. If the Court had been satisfied that there was a desire on the part of the testator that specific securities should be selected from the foreign funds he was possessed of at his death, it would have been the duty of the Court to send it to the Master to make a selection; but there was not enough to satisfy the Court that there was such a desire in the testator's mind, and the direction of the ViceChancellor is quite consistent with the view I take of the construction of the will. A power is given to the trustees over the whole estate, with a discretion of selecting any of the existing funds. Do not the ordinary rule of the Court come into operation in such a case? That rule is, that where a testator has pointed out no particular fund for the annuity, the Court acts for him, and directs the investment to be made in Three per Cent. Consols. The question is not whether the trustees have power to allow the stock to remain invested on foreign securities, but whether they have power to change the investment; and in my opinion the general power of conversion in the latter part of the will clearly overrides the whole will. It is not necessary, in this view of the case, to allude to the extraordinary consequences that might follow from a different construction. I am of opinion that the Vice Chancellor bad decided rightly, and as it is a hardship on the annuitant to undergo a rehearing, the appellants must pay the costs of the appeal. ROLLS COURT. BLENKINSOPP v. BLENKINSOPP. Practice-Affidavit, admissibility of-Production of documents-Privileged communications. of Bishop Auckland, and that he was consulted by davit.] Oh yes; but that is a different class of cases. A bill was filed to set aside a deed on the ground of produce them, of course Mr. Trotter will do so. In He The MASTER of the ROLLS.-The affidavit in support of the motion is important only as bearing upon the answer of Blenkinsopp, which was made in relation to matters not now before the Court; and if it were now to be made in relation to this matter, it might be different. I cannot, there. fore, receive that affidavit. The bill was filed by the plaintiff against Mrs. Blenkinsopp to obtain the assistance of this Court, to which she is entitled, to enable her to reach the property, which the commencement of the proceedings against him in Mr. Blenkinsopp, by the deed executed in 1842, after the Ecclesiastical Court, has alienated, for the parpose of withdrawing it from the reach of that Court, and so defeating its process in the execution of its sentence afterwards pronounced against him. It is on the contrary tended to support the facts stated in said that Mr. Trotter was Mr. Blenkinsopp's adThe plaintiff, Mrs. Blenkinsopp, had instituted the bill, that affidavit was admissible, and the Court viser in the steps taken by him, but the plaintiff bas proceedings against her husband, Mr. G. T. L. Bien- will take the facts as therein stated, if the answer nothing to do with the advice given from time to kinsopp, in the Ecclesiastical Court, for a divorce, in does not deny them, which it does not. [The MASTER time. The bill, however, charges that there are which she had succeeded, and an order was made and of the ROLLS.-I have received an affidavit in sup- many documents and papers which, together with process issued for payment of costs and alimony. port of an allegation in the bill, in respect of docu- other papers which passed between Mr. BlenkinDuring the progress of the suit, however, (which was ments where no notice was taken of them in the sopp and Mr. Trotter, have a material bearing on instituted in the court at Durham, and carried by answer.] The defendant, to protect himself from the concoction of the alleged fraud, and these the appeal to the court above,) Mr. Blenkinsopp, by a production, must state in his defence what documents plaintiff wishes to have produced. The bill also deed dated September, 1842, made a voluntary con he claims to be protected. [The MASTER of the alleges that, by the deed, Trotter was constituted one veyance of his real and personal estate affected by this ROLLS.-The documents relating to the trust are of the trustees, for the purpose of being made an inorder to Messrs. Trotter and Fenwick (both solici- mixed up with the others, and the question is, if they strument in effecting the fraud complained of. Oa tors, but not in partnership), on certain trusts for his are protected.] If the Court receives an affidavit in the part of the defendants, it is desired to conceal the creditors, with the alleged purpose of defeating the support of the plaintiff's motion in one case, it may facts of the case, and to be protected from the disprocess of the Ecclesiastical Court. Mrs. Blenkin- do so in another; and as it does so in cases of in- covery of them; and Trotter says he ought to be prosopp, being unable to enforce payment of alimony, junction, so it may in those of production. But we tected from the required discovery, because he had instituted the present suit in January 1846, for the have no need in this case to have recourse to affida-been previously employed by the defendant Blenkin purpose of setting aside the deed of trust, and made her vits, for here it is not the privilege of Trotter, but of sopp. He says, I was employed by Mr. Blenkinsopp husband and Messrs. Trotter and Fenwick defendants Blenkinsopp, that is in question, and the latter does with reference to the property comprised in the deed thereto. Trotter and Fenwick, by their answers, ad- not himself claim it. They cited Addis v. Campbell, in question, as his solicitor; that I am still such mitted that they had in their possession the divers 1 Beav. 258; Ord v. White, 3 Beav. 357; Taggart v. solicitor; that he consulted me as to the course he documents, &c. set forth in the schedules annexed to Hewlitt, 1 Mer. 499; Taylor v. Hening, 4 Beav. 235. should adopt with reference to the suit in the Eccle their answer, and relating to the matters stated in the Kindersley, for the defendants Trotter and Fen siastical Court; that I advised him to employ a bill; and they stated that they were ready and will-wick.-The admissibility of the affidavit is an im- proctor; and that, so far as a solicitor was employed ing to act in all things relating to the matters in the portant question. An affidavit was first allowed in by him, I was his solicitor. Now Trotter could not suit as the Court should direct; and they did not by respect of documents not affirmed or denied by the be actually employed as proctor in the cause in the the answer claim any protection against the produc-answer; and the next step was where, when the plain- Ecclesiastical Court, for he was a solicitor only; but tion of the papers, &c. on the ground of their being tiff alleged facts of which the defendant said in his as his solicitor, he might advise with Blenkinsopp. privileged documents. Besides, Trotter, in his answer he knew nothing, an affidavit was allowed to The statement in Trotter's answer, though very answer, stated that for some years previously to the verify those facts. But if the defendant denies the vague, is, that he did certain things as Blenkinsopp's commencement of the suit in the Ecclesiastical facts alleged, or that the documents contained such solicitor; and, if the matter rested on the answer Court, he had been employed by his co-defendant, matters as they were alleged to contain, no affidavit alone, there would be no sufficient reason why these Mr. Blenkinsopp, as his solicitor, in matters of bu- by the plaintiff is allowed. [The MASTER of the documents should be protected; but, in that state siness relating to his property in the neighbourhood ROLLS.-Somewhere the answer is treated as an affi- of things, he asks leave to file an affidavit, which accordingly he does file; and in that he does shewing the defendant's case within the terms of the Act, under this power the company gave the plaintiff that he was employed as the solicitor of the defend- supposing the new building did project (which was notice, and accordingly took possession, referring ant Blenkinsopp in relation to the proceedings in the not admitted), the bill charged that a low wall sur- in such notice to a plan annexed, in which Ecclesiastical Court, and particularly with reference rounding an area in front of the defendant's house the lands were described by certain numbers, and to certain cases prepared for the opinion of counsel, had been removed, whereas no such wall ever ex-coloured red. Subsequently two other Acts of Parand the opinions of counsel thereon, mentioned in the isted, but the fence consisted of iron rails, no part of liament were passed, and the company requiring a schedule to his answer: I cannot make an order for which had been removed. The Act provided that the further portion of the land, gave plaintiff another production of papers after that. I never make an setting back should take place according to an ele- notice for that purpose, as nearly as possible identical order allowing protection to any documents without vation approved of by the town council; but the bill with the first, with the exception, however, of a slight considerable regret, nor will I ever make an order stated only that the line of demarcation was approved variation of about nine perches of land. The lastpermitting a concealment of papers which prima facie by the corporation. mentioned Acts only related to the making and estaought to be produced; but there are rules, on the blishing the different stations on the projected line, whole wisely established and, it is thought, best caland contained no powers to take lands, but referred culated for the promotion of justice and the forwardonly to those already taken under the powers of the ing of its due administration, which governs the first Act. The last notices referred to the Acts in the practice in these cases; and it is with the view of plural number; and the present application was preserving those rules that I must console myself grounded upon the position that for the purposes of for the necessity of doing, in the present case, what the third Act the company could not take lands,-a seems to be a hardship; and though I am not satisproceeding which that Act did not authorise them to fied that the affidavit is so precise as it might have do; but their only power was under the first Act, been, yet I cannot make the order asked. Though which power was now exhausted and gone. Trotter may be right in saying that each of those letters comes under the operation of the rule as to privileged communications between solicitor and client, yet each of the papers referred to may very probably relate to the execution of the deed complained of; but I cannot, consistently with the authorities, order the production of the papers referred to in Trotter's affidavit. The information sought, however, may possibly be obtained by means of an amended bill, and the examination of Trotter thereon. VICE-CHANCELLOR OF ENGLAND'S COURT. Tuesday, May 4. Where an Act of Parliament has been obtained, having Stuart and W. M. James, in support of the motion. Rolt and Bagshaw, for the motion. Thursday, May 6. The circumstances The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-I am of opinion that the first question is this-whether the case before me is brought within the principle upon which I have already of late decided certain cases. Upon the ground that a notice having been given that a railway company required particular portions of land, describing them, and then varied their notice, I have held that would not do, because the company ought to set out at first what land they wanted. I am not yet aware that my Lord Chancellor has expressed a different opinion from my own decisions upon the subject. The effect of holding a contrary opinion would be to render the holder of land uncertain as to the remaining portions of his property. I think there is a complete identity of description. In one notice there is a difference of nine perches; but that does not affect the identity, and no human being could entertain any The VICE-CHANCELLOR thought that, notwith-doubt what land was required. The notices them standing there was a difficulty in understanding what selves prove that fact beyond reasonable dispute, and the ultimate construction of Acts of Parliament might upon the question respecting the powers of the Act, I be, it did not appear to his mind that the construc- think the company had full power to do what they tion put upon the 94th section of the Act by the plain-bave done; and, upon the whole, the case is such a tiffs, was the correct one. It must be construed by one as cannot be sustained. I must therefore refuse nection. taking the plan and the words of the clause in con- the motion. After reading the clause, his Honour said that the expression was "now projects beyond the regular line of the street." It seemed that the street could not be said to project, having regard to the house in question, which was nearest to it on the east, but rather receded in as nearly a parallel a line as Circumstances under which a domicile will be presumed, possible-that is, in reference to the buildings. And notwithstanding the party, some time previous to his as to the situation of the area, his Honour did not death, was in the habit of frequently changing the think that it did project, having regard to the house. place of his abode, and died away from his home. The words "now projects" referred to the time of This was a question which came before the Court passing the Act of Parliament. That he had always upon exceptions to the Master's report. The suit considered the Lord Chancellor's expressions in the was originally instituted for the administration of the case of the Pictorial Almanac to be correct, namely, estate of a Mr. Peter Cochrane. that the Court sat to interfere by injunction in supwere briefly as follows:-The testator, Mr. P. Cochport of the apparent legal right, which, if it were rane, was the son of Mr. John Cochrane, of Chipreasonably clear, ought not to be destroyed by some pings, in the parish of Kilbarchen, in the county of spontaneous act of the defendant, and the Court Renfrew, in Scotland. At the age of fifteen he was would not grant the injunction. It was impossible apprenticed to a surgeon in his native place, and to uphold the injunction, since there appeared to be so afterwards left the country and went to India in the much doubt and ambiguity upon the construction of capacity of a medical officer to the East-India Comthe Act itself. Then as to the costs, it appeared that pany, where he resided for a period of forty-three the bill was filed on the 23rd of February, and no ap-years, having married, and accumulated a considerplication was made to the Court until the 6th of able fortune. In the year 1818 he retired from his March following, and his Honour conceived that had profession and situation on a pension, and returned that fact been known to him he should have directed to his native country, Scotland, when he succeeded in notice to be given, and the case heard upon argument. purchasing his paternal property from the trustees of The plaintiffs ought, therefore, not only to have the his father's creditors, and built a handsome mansion injunction dissolved against them, but that they must upon the estate, which he occupied up to the year pay the costs of the suit, and that the parties must 1825, when he took a tour to Switzerland, and broke try their rights at law. up his establishment at Chippings. During some time in the year following he went to Paris, and resided in lodgings on the Boulevards until the year 1829, when he again visited his mansion in Scotland, having spent a short time in London on his return. He then went to Edinburgh, where he instructed his solicitor to prepare his will, which he executed afterwards in London. The testator, in the month of November, 1829, again took up his residence in Paris, having changed his place of abode from the Boulevards to the Place Vendôme. In this part of Paris he lived until June 1831, when, being in a bad state of health, he set out for England, but died on the evening of the 10th of that same month, at Beauvais, on his return to Scotland. At the time of his death his property consisted of the estate and mansion-house at Chippings, which was valued at 10,000l. one million rupees in India, a large sum of money in England, and about thirty thousand French rentes. There were certain limitations and provisions in Mr. Cochrane's will that failed; in consequence of which his next of kin became entitled to such undisposed-of property; and now the question for discussion was the following:-According to the laws of England, all the next of kin would be entitled under the Statute of Distributions, but by the law of Scotland, the distribution would not extend beyond a certain relationship; in consequence of which, some individuals whom the English law would admit, became thus excluded by the Scotch law; and it thus SIMPSON V. THE LANCASTER AND CARLISLE Held, that the notices not being calculated to cast any The plaintiff in the suit applied for an injunction became very important to ascertain where the testator was domiciled, and it was referred to the Master to ascertain this point. The Master, by his report, found that the testator's domicile was in Scotland, and exceptions were now taken to that report for the purpose of having the question determined by the Court itself,-those who represented the next of kin contending that, in the events which had happened, there was an intestacy as to certain portions of the property from the time of the testator's decease; but those persons to whom the Scotch law was applicable were not brought before the Court. Much evidence was gone into for the purpose of shewing minutely all the circumstances that attended the testator's various movements, and more especially as to his intention of fixing his residence permanently in any particular locality from time to time. C. P. Cooper and W. Morris, in support of the exceptions. Bethell and Gifford appeared to support the Master's report. The VICE-CHANCELLOR observed that the rule of law was perfectly clear in reference to a party's domicile, which remained until it was proved by good evidence that the party's intention really was that his domicile should be changed. That in referring to the evidence before the Court, it was said that the testator's residence from Scotland was only temporary; and the circumstance which appeared, of a certain portion of his furniture still remaining at Chippings, although packed up for removal, seems to be evidence that whatever might be his movements, he entertained some secret intention in his own mind of returning to Scotland. The only true result of the depositions that had been read to the Court appeared to be that there was no design to change that domicile, and he felt himself, therefore, bound to come to the conclusion that the Master's finding was right-namely, that the testator's domicile was in Scotland; for unless it could be shewn by overwhelming evidence that it was otherwise, the rule of law had settled the question. The exceptions to the Master's, report must be overruled. VICE-CHANCELLOR KNIGHT Tuesday, April 20. Where two separate suits had been instituted by the pable of being examined. The question which arose in this case is sufficiently stated in the Vice-Chancellor's judgment. Russell and Glasse for the plaintiffs in the two suits. Lloyd, and Wigram and Craig, for the defendants. The following authorities were cited:-Nevil v. Johnson, 2 Vern. 447; Barstow v. Palmes, Prec. in Ch. 233; 1 Daniell's Chancery Practice, 832, 2nd edit.; Carrington v. Cornock, 2 Sim. 567; Byrne v. Frere, 2 Moll. 157; and City of London v. Perkins, 3 Bro. P. C. 602. Saturday, April 24. JONES v. LEWIS, Re TRINITY HOUSE. in which the next tenant for life in remainder is the Taxing-master, who reduced it to 9031. 6s. 8d. A A corporation effected a compulsory purchase under Bacon and Pitman for the petitioner. Wigram and Lloyd for the Trinity House. By the 6 & 7 Wm. 4, c. 79, the corporation of the The VICE-CHANCELLOR said, that with regard to Trinity House was empowered to purchase lands, the costs contained in the first class complained of, it lighthouses, and tolls; and in cases of purchase from had been said that the Trinity House had gained incapacitated persons, the corporation was to pay by the course that had been taken; but that course the purchase-money into the Bank, subject to the was adopted without any reference to or communicaorder of the Court, to the intent that the money might tion with the Trinity House. These costs had arisen be applied, with the approbation of the Court, in the by causing the releases and reconveyances by the purchase of other lands to be settled to the same uses, incumbrancers to be made to the vendors; but they and in the meantime might be invested in consols: ought not to have been incurred as between the and by the same statute it was provided that the Trinity House and the purchaser (the petitioner), Court might order that all the reasonable costs, without a bargain relating to the payment of them. charges, and expenses attending such purchase, or The Taxing-master had come to a right conclusion in which might be incurred in consequence thereof, and not allowing them. With respect to the costs conalso of the investment of the purchase-money in real tained in the second and third classes, the Master was or government securities, and reinvestment in the right as to them. The sum allowed for the state of purchase of lands, together with the costs, charges, facts was exclusive of the schedule,-a long schedule, and expenses of obtaining the proper orders, and of containing, substantially, only what was contained the other proceedings for such purposes, and of the in the schedule to the contract. The Master appeared payment of the dividends, and of the principal out of to have allowed 8d. a folio for that state of facts, exCourt, should be paid by the corporation. The Sker-clusive of the schedule. A solicitor ought to be ries Lighthouse and lands adjoining being required by liberally remunerated for his labour; and he thought the corporation, they, in pursuance of the said Act, that the solicitors had in this case been liberally purchased the same at a valuation ascertained by the remunerated. He should dismiss the petition with sheriff and a jury, viz. 444,9847. 11s. 2d. To a por- costs, not exceeding 201. tion of the estate, the Rev. John Jones was entitled, as first tenant for life under the will of Morgan Jones, the subsequent limitations being to M. Jones for life, with remainder to his first and other sons in tail male, a Monday, April 26. Practice Demurrer. Brownsword v. Edwards, 2 Ves. sen. 243, an autho rity for the practice, in cases where the questions raised upon the bill are doubtful, of the Court's overruling the demurrer without prejudice to the defendant's insisting upon the same defence, by way of answer. with divers remainders over. The purchase-money for this portion of the estate was invested by the corporation in the purchase of 141,4757. 15s. 10d. Three per Cent. Consols in the name of the Accountant-General. On the 6th of July, 1843, a contract was entered into between the persons entitled to the Westmead estate, and the said J. Jones, whereby it was agreed that, subject The VICE-CHANCELLOR, in the case of Brownsword to the direction and approbation of the Court of Edwards, 2Ves. sen. 243, being cited, observed that Chancery, the said persons entitled should sell, and question of practice on demurrer had frequently J. Jones should purchase, the Westmead estate, and occurred to him as having been decided by very high the inheritance thereof in fee simple in possession, authority, but he had not been able to remember free from incumbrances, except an annual crown where that authority was to be found. From the The VICE-CHANCELLOR.-Were the point before rent, and the liability to bear half the expense of the case, however, of Brownsword v. Edwards, he perceived me substantially a point decided by the House of embankment against the sea, for the sum of 96,000l. that Lord Hardwicke was the judge upon whose auLords in The City of London v. Perkins, or any other to be paid out of the said sum of Consols, or the pro-thority he had on several occasions acted. The point case, of course there would be no room for argument; duce thereof; that J. Jones should, at his own costs, he alluded to was, that where questions were clear I must necessarily decide according to that case. obtain the sanction of the Court to the contract, and upon the face of the bill, the Court would, if it thought Subject to that question, as to the decision of the that the said persons entitled should execute, and pro- fit, determine them upon the demurrer, but would House of Lords, I am not aware that the point is cure to be executed by all necessary parties, a con- do so only in those cases where the questions were governed by decision. In the case in the House of veyance of the said estate, free from incumbrances, clear and plain upon the bill; but where they were Lords, the question arose upon a custom; the parties except as aforesaid, to such uses as the Court should doubtful, it would overrule the demurrer without there were substantially the same. The question direct, and that such conveyance should be prepared prejudice to the defendant's making the same defence was, as I understand it, between the city of London by the purchaser, and the expense thereof borne in the by his answer. His Honour understood that it had and the public; and although the different individuals manner prescribed by the said Act, or in such other been stated in quarters for which he had the most may have been before the Court in each case, if all manner as that the vendors should not in any case be unfeigned respect, that he had acted contrary to the the parties were substantially the same, there are liable to pay any part thereof. The Master having course of the Court in adopting that practice. It other cases in which the same observation may apply. approved of the title to the Westmead estate, it was, was satisfactory to find that it was Lord Hardwicke The case here stands thus:-There is a tenant for on the 28th of June, 1845, referred to him to approve whose authority he had followed, for at p. 247 of the life in possession of an estate, subject to a series of of a conveyance, &c.; and it was also referred to the report of Brownsword v. Edwards, his Lordship says: limitations under a particular will; and he is also a Taxing-master to tax the costs, charges, and expenses As this is a question upon the legal title to an tenant for life of certain personalty which stands attending the purchase, &c.; and it was ordered that estate on the construction of a will, if there was any upon a corresponding series of limitations. The tenant the said corporation should pay such costs, charges, doubt, I should not determine it on demurrer, but for life happens to be the trustee as to the real estate; and expenses. The Westmead estate having been would, notwithstanding the inclination of my opinion he is not the trustee as to the personal estate settled. subject to many incumbrances, and the persons en- might be in favour of defendant, overrule the demurTwo suits are instituted against him under the will in titled thereto being resident in Ireland, France, and rer, without prejudice to defendant's fusisting on the respect of alleged mismanagement and alleged improper elsewhere, it was suggested by the purchaser's coun- same matters by way of answer, so that it might more treatment of the real and personal estate, of both of sel that these incumbrances should be got in by the fully come before the Court at the hearing; this the which he is tenant for life, and of one portion of which vendors for the purpose of facilitating the completion Court sometimes does on the construction of wills." he is also a trustee. One of these suits is instituted of the purchase, and to this suggestion the vendors' by the person who is next tenant for life, subject to solicitors assented. The various deeds for getting in the contingency of the tenant for life not having these incumbrances were prepared by the vendors' issue; the other suit is instituted by the first tenant and submitted to the purchaser's counsel, and were in tail in existence, who comes behind or after the subsequently altered by providing for the payment of reversionary tenant for life and tenant for life in re- the incumbrances out of the purchase money. Upon mainder, who has instituted the other suit which I the completion of the purchase, the full bill of costs, have mentioned. The evidence which is the subject charges, and expenses attending the purchase, &c. of the present discussion, has been taken in the suit amounting to 1,1301. 10s. 6d. was submitted to the VICE-CHANCELLOR WIGRAM'S COURT. Saturday, May 8. STEED v. OLIVER. Practice-Examination of a co-defendant-Order t course-Form of order since the stat. 6 & 7 Vict. c. 85. |