Page images
PDF
EPUB

So far we cordially agree with our remonstrants. But they now proceed to the second branch of their argument.

"This provision being made," they say, " for honest debtors, it should be provided that arrest should be restored as against dishonest debtors. Under such circumstances arrest could not injure an honest man, because an honest man, in such circumstances, would either pay, or, if unable to do so, would call his creditors together and settle with them voluntarily, or seek the protection of the Court in the manner above proposed to be provided."

And still so far do we agree with the remonstrants. We also have no objection to the arrest of dishonest debtors,-nay, we would both arrest and imprison; we would make fraud in the contraction of a debt, and evasion in the payment of it, an indictable misdemeanour, to be tried and punished like picking pockets or any other crime.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

not being compulsory, but merely permissive.
sue the system thus sanctioned by Parliament, when
Mr. WARREN is, however, fully resolved to pur-
it accords with the wishes of his clients, so that but A
few Deeds, Conveyances, Assignments, Leases, &c.
will exceed the charge of a couple of pounds (some-
times less), exclusive of stamps.

Treatise on the Pleadings in Suits in the Court of Chancery by English Bill. By JOHN MITFORD, Esq. (the late Lord Redesdale.) Fifth Edition, comprising a large body of Additional Notes, by JOSIAH W. SMITH, B.C.L. Barristerat-Law. London: 1847. Stevens and Norton.

ing Drafts of Deeds before Counsel, "to peruse and
A practice deserving of reprehension is that of lay-
settle"-of course at the client's expense; whereas,
every Solicitor is, or ought to be, himself fully com- WITH the practitioner in equity this famous Treatise
petent, in nine cases out of ten (if not in nineteen occupies the place which in the library of the Com.
out of twenty) which come under his notice, to pre-mon Lawyer is filled by STEPHENS. It is, in fact,
dinary titles, without saddling his client unnecessarily foundation of the student's learning and the law-
pare and settle such Deeds, and to give opinions on or- an essay on the principles of Equity Pleading, the
with Counsel's fees. Some cases may occasionally

But our objection to arrest on mesne process occur, however, where the opinion of a Barrister, who yer's practice, scientific in its plan, logical in its

is precisely this: that if adopted without previous enquiry by some competent and disinterested authority, it is just as likely to be wielded against the honest as the dishonest debtor; and if previous inquiry be made, it must either be ex parte, and in such case no sufficient check could be imposed upon its improper adoption, or if it be resorted to only after a hearing of both parties, it is needless, for the defendant would then be in the power of the Court, and might be dealt with accordingly.

Perhaps, however, it will be more fair to let the remonstrants speak for themselves. Thus they answer us:

"But then, you say, a man may be arrested unjustly, and you allude to the cases where pretended creditors have lately been suing provisional committeemen. To this I answer, Arrest on a mere affidavit, without judicial inquiry, judicial discretion exercised, and a clear prima facia case, is a gross abuse, and ought never to be restored. Arrest should take place only on a clear case, and upon some such plan as that proposed in Mr. Warburton's Bill. Guarded against abuse, arrest is the most valuable process known to the law, because it forces the debtor to meet his creditor, or drives him to bankruptcy."

The terms "guarded against abuse," as the condition of arrest, contain the point of difference between ourselves and the remonstrants. We look upon that to be impracticable: we have seen no method of accomplishing it that will stand the test of examination, when applied to cases likely to occur continually. We repeat, that if the mere affidavit of the plaintiff is not to suffice, there must be a judicial inquiry; if such, then either an inquiry on the hearing of the plaintiff only, or of both parties; if of the plaintiff only, it is impossible that justice can be done or abuses avoided; if the defendant be heard also, he will be in the jurisdiction of the Court, and can be dealt with just as if he had been formally arrested. Upon this chain of argument, in which we can find no fallacy, the conclusion is unavoidable, that Arrest on Mesne Process would be either mischievous or needless.

If our correspondents can answer this, we will readily give place to their reply. The entire subject of Insolvency is as difficult as it is important. We are not wedded to any theory of it, nor do we entertain any prejudices: we are anxious for the broadest inquiry, and open to enlightenment from every quarter. We feel that, often as it has been touched upon here, it is very far from being yet exhausted, so that there will be frequent call to resume it before a rational code of Insolvency shall be ripe for the fiat of the Legislature.

ADVERTISING ATTORNEYS. THE following card has been sent to us. It is one of the most disgraceful specimens of the offences of its class which has yet fallen under our notice. It carries its own reproof.

confines his practice to one particular branch of the
Profession, might not only be prudent, but essen-
tially necessary, but not as a general practice, either
to save trouble, or avoid responsibility.
Office, No. 9, Bell-yard,
Doctors' Commons.

NECROLOGY

OF LEGISLATORS, MAGISTRATES, AND LAWYERS.

Lord

ELDON said of it that it was "a wonderful effort to
deductions, perspicuous in its language.
collect what is to be deduced from authorities
speaking so little what is clear." And Sir THOMAS
PLUMER remarked with equal truth that this book
"has ever since been received by the whole Profes-
sion as an authoritative standard and guide."

The fourth edition was published so long ago as the year 1827. Although since that time there has been no change in the principles of Equity Pleading, there have been many changes in formulas CHAIRMAN OF THE DEVON QUARTER SESSIONS. hausted, a fitting opportunity offered for the proCOLONEL FULFORD, and in matters of practice. That edition being exFulford. Without indulging in any lengthened pane- entrusted to Mr. JOSIAH SMITH. Nor could a Our obituary this week records the death of Colonel duction of a new one, the preparation of which was gyric of his many excellent qualities, we may venture to better choice have been made. The duty of editor say of him, in brief, that as no man was more respected in his lifetime, so no man will be more regretted in his has been ably and laboriously performed. Every death. Estimable and exemplary in all the relations sentence has been revised; he has added a marginal charge of his public duties, unpretending in his man-ments and orders relative to pleading made since of private life, indefatigable and forbearing in the dis- analysis, numerous notes, comprising the enactner, conciliatory in his disposition, and unostentatious the last edition, with the decisions thereon, and an in his charities, he was a good neighbour, a good elaborate and very useful note "on Parties," whose landlord, and a warm friend. Colonel Fulford's name importance justifies its having a distinct place at He was for many years lieutenant-colonel of the was held throughout this county in universal respect. the end. East Devon militia, chairman of the quarter sessions, sions Mr. SMITH says that he has taken some In the preparation of the reports of recent deci. and chairman of the Exeter turnpike trust. From these more prominent positions he had for some time pains to divest them of needless verbiage, so as to retired, but he continued to attend to public business put before the reader the point decided, relating down almost to the very period of his decease. The to the question under discussion, avoiding all fort, as it is written in Domesday Book, from which mere dicta and opinions, which have introduced so family of Fulford is of Saxon origin, and held Fole- irrelevant matter. He has also prudently shunned place the name is derived. Here, as it appears by much perplexity into the law. We hope that the records, as well as by registries in the College of example thus set by Mr. SMITH will be generally Arms, they were seated in the time of Richard I. and followed by legal writers, and that they will eschew have continued in the possession of the same name in in like manner the incidental expressions of halflong period of more than 600 years. the male line, by uninterrupted descent, during the house was once garisoned for Charles I. and was of an argument, and which really indicate no more Their mansion- formed opinions thrown out by judges in the course taken by a part of Fairfax's army, in December 1645. than the direction of their thoughts-perhaps their Many knights of the family distinguished themselves first impressions, and which they might modify, if in the Holy Land, Sir Baldwin de Fulford, more par- not change entirely, were they called upon to decide knights who went up with the Earl of Devon to re- both sides. Being a book so well known, no speciticularly. Sir Thomas Fulford was one of the the point after a hearing of all that is to be said on lieve Exeter, when besieged by Perkin Warbeck, in the year 1497.-Western Luminary. mens of its contents are required.

BIRTHS, MARRIAGES, AND DEATHS.

[The charge for the insertion of the above is 5s.]
BIRTHS.

COOPER.-On the 18th inst. at Great James-street, Bedford-
row, the lady of Montague Ormsby Cooper, esq. of a
daughter.

HOGGINS.-On the 18th inst. at St. John's-wood, the lady

of A. W. Hoggins, esq. barrister, of a son.

JOHNS.-On the 8th inst. at Mansfield House, Ringwood,

the wife of H. T. Johns, esq. of a daughter.
MARRIAGES.

BARNETT, Charles George, esq. to Marianne Jane, eldest
daughter of Edward St. John Mildmay, esq. and grand-
daughter of the late Sir Henry Mildmay, bart. on the 17th
inst. at St. George's, Hanover-square.
BORLASE, Samuel, esq. of Castle Horneck, Cornwall, to
Mary Anne, daughter of the late William Copeland, esq.
of Chigwell, Essex, on the 15th inst. at St. Pancras
SHARP, Mr. Frederick, son of Mr. Daniel Sharp, solicitor,

Church.

Norwich, to Lydia, second daughter of Hargrave Wraith,
esq. Blackburn, on the 15th inst.

DEATHS.

A Treatise on the Law of Ways, including Highways, Turnpike-roads, and Tolls, Private Rights of Way, Bridges and Ferries, with the Law of the Prescription Act, and of Railways, as far as they relate to Highways and Turnpike Tolls. By HUMPHREY W. WOOLRYCH, Barrister-atLaw. Second Edition. London: 1847. Benning and Co.

HERE is a portly volume of nearly 700 pages of closely printed matter, devoted to the Law of Ways. And yet is this attained without any needless verbosity. Mr. WoOLRYCH has treated his subject fully, but not tediously. There is no more than will be required by the practitioner.

The appearance of "Second Edition" upon a title-page is proof that a law book has borne that best of tests-experience. Lawyers have found it changed in parts, they desire to have their old useful in their practice, and when the law has been acquaintance in a new dress adapted to the present fashion. The Profession has received Mr. WOOLRYCH as the best authority on the subject of Ways and Highways-and we are not prepared to dispute the choice; he deserves the preference that has EDGE, Samuel, esq. solicitor, of Broomfield, Cheetham-hill, it by divers improvements introduced into this been given to him, and he has striven to maintain GROVE, Thomas, esq. on the 15th inst. at Ferne-house, Wilts, Manchester, at Newbold-terrace, Leamington, aged 72. edition.

CARPENTER, Mrs. Jane, the widow of the late Samuel Car-
penter, esq. barrister-at-law, at Saltash, Cornwall, on the
18th inst. aged 67.
DoDD, Charles, esq. solicitor, Billiter-street, on the 15th inst.

at Camberwell, aged 69.

aged 88.

Besides the Law of Ways, Turnpikes, and

ridges, treated in the first edition, two entirely next week. Whitmore, London.-Strevens, E. victualler, ew chapters have been added to this; the first on last exam. passed.-Wiles, W. pawnbroker, last exam. passed. ie Prescription Act, as it affects the Law of Ways; nd the second on Railways, as connected with urnpike-roads and Highways.

JOURNAL OF PROPERTY.

DIVIDENDS.

Bankrupts' Estates.

Official Assignees are given, to whom apply for the Dividends.

Three chapters on Pleading, Evidence, and Aeraman and Co. ship builders, first joint, 2s. 6d. Hutosts, as they respect indictments or actions touch-ton, Bristol.-Adamson, J. grocer, final, 3s. 3d. Hobson, ng Ways, complete the information compressed Manchester.-Botcherby, J. coal owner, first, 2s. 6d. Wakto this valuable work, which will be the standard Groom, London.-Brett, J. grocer, first, 2s. 6d. Kynaston, ley, Newcastle. Bradbury, G. ironmonger, first, 14s. ne upon the topic on which it treats. Hull. Broadbent, J. woollen manufacturer, first, 7d. Hope, Leeds. -Browning, J. D. upholsterer, first, 3s. 6d. Hutton, Bristol.-Bullen, J. K. tailor, first, 4s. 4d. Edwards, London.-Challen, J. brewer, first, 1s. Edwards, London.-Coles, J. tobacconist, first, 9d. Groom, London. Collins, W. L. brewer, first, 1s. 2d. Edwards, London.Fowler, A. C. draper, second, 2s. 114d. Whitmore, London. Hobhouse and Co. fourth joint, 4d. Miller, Bristol.- Leonard, H. ironmonger, first, 2s. 11d. Miller, Bristol.-Lowis, T. laceman, first, 1s. Wakley, Newcastle.- Openshaw, G. H. cloth manufacturer, first, 8s. 9d. Hobson, Manchester.-Roberts and Hughes, drapers, final joint, Is. 24d.; first sep. Hughcs, 20s. Hobson, Manchester.-Rogers, T. dentist, first, 2s. 2d. Hope, Leeds.-Thompson, T. grocer, first, 3s. Groom, London.-Whitehead, G. printer, second, 2s. Edwards, London.

Public Sales.

By Mr. F. CHINNOCK, at the Mart. Leasehold ground rents, amounting to 3067. per annum, ecured upon twenty villa residences situate on the west side of the Foxley-road. Eltham-place, and Foxley-place, between Camberwell and Kennington, in seventeen lots, being a ground-rent of 187. per annum each lot, for fifty-four years; produced from 2751. to 2851. a lot-total 4,8057.

[blocks in formation]

Ten acres of freehold land, at Stroud-green, Islington1,000l. By Messrs. G. JONES and SON.

Insolvents' Estates.

Baber, J. hair dresser, Duke-st. Grosvenor-square, 61d.— Bamford, J. clerk in the Ordnance-office, Lower Deptford, 4s. 44d.-Berrill, G. clockmaker, Stoney Stratford, 8d.Campbell, A. lieutenant in the navy, John-st. Mile Endroad, fifth, 4s. 63d.-Cartwright, A. clerk in the customs, Shoe-lane, 1s. 54d..-Ebhart, B. retired lieutenant, Chelsea, 2s. 8d. (making 20s.-Fussell, J. victualler, Farnham, 18. 14d.-Hamilton, J. out of employ, Stepney, 4s.-Kelly, J. C. clerk, Titchfield-st. 2s. 94d.-Lee, G. retired boatswain, office, 4s. 9d. (making 7s. 11d.)-Oliver, E. plumber, Highst. Kensington, 2s. 9d.-Raabe, C. D. tailor, Holly-crescent, Camden-town, 5s. 24d.-Reed, T. lieutenant, on half-pay, Notting-hill, 10d.-Ryder, A. general merchant, Mare-st. Hackney, 2d. and 1-12th of a penny.-Scoley, A. F. lodginghouse keeper, Maize-pond, 2s. 74d.

A freehold residence, No. 1, Peckham-grove, let at 307. Deptford, further 8s. 8d.-Marshall, J. clerk in the Navyper annum-4307. A ditto, No. 2-440.

THE following scale of charges, reduced more than one-third, has been adopted for Advertisements of Estates for Sale, &c. exceeding 10 lines in length:

For the first 70 words

[ocr errors]

5s.

For every succeeding 30 words. 1s.

THE MONEY MARKET.

[blocks in formation]

ASSIGNMENTS

To Trustees for the benefit of Creditors. Gazette, April 16:

Dalton, W. C. builder, Leicester, April 3. Trusts. J. Cooke, auctioneer, and J. Austen, lime merchant, both of Leicester. Sol. Freer, Leicester.-Fowler, R. draper, Axminster, March 10. Trust. J. Bouch, warehouseman, Bread-st. Sols. Sole and Co. Aldermanbury.-Grocock, W. H. oil warehouseman, Marchmont-st. April 12. Trusts. H. Stringer, oil merchant, Leadenhall-st. and W. S. Hale, wax chandler, Queen-street, Cheapside. Sol. Kempster, Kennington-lane.-Partridge, R. saddler, Bury St. Edmunds, March 31. Trust. J. Eldrid, saddlers' ironmonger, Fore-st. 87 87 87 Sol. Burkitt, Curriers'-hall.-Stanton, W. lace manufac85 86 86 86 85 85 turer, April 10. Trusts. J. Thackeray, cotton spinner, Rad871 87 88 841 877 874 ford, and T. Gee, ironfounder, Nottingham. Sol. Campbell, 9 81 8 Nottingham. 81 83 194 192 193 193 195 194 245

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

1092

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

Gazette, April 20.

Eveleigh, E. S. ironmonger, St. Blazey, April 10. Trusts. H. Thompson, merchant, Birmingham, and J. Yeoman, par merchant, Sheffield. Sol. Shilston, St. Austell.-Fleay, R. brewer, Bristol, Feb. 27. Trust. C. Harris, soap manufacturer, Bristol. Sols. Gillard and Flook, Bristol.-Griffiths, H. draper, Neath, March 18. Trusts. G. Bartleet, warehouseman, Noble-st. and C. Moore and S. Watts, warehousemen, Manchester. Sols. Bradley and Co. Gresham-st. -Griffiths, J. draper, Strand, April 9. Trusts. H. W. Castle, warehouseman, Love-lane, and A. Beater, warehouseman, Aldermanbury. Sols. Sole and Turner, Aldermanbury. -Kidd, T. grocer, Linton, April 12. Trusts. W. Stockdale and E. Robinson, grocers, both of Skipton. Sol. Areston, Skipton.-Moreland, B. ironfounder, Vincent-st. Old-street-road, April 19. Trust. W. Beckwith, jun. accountant, Winchester-st. Sol. Broughton, jun. Falconsquare. Pinniger, A. draper, Calne, Wiltshire, March 19. Trust. J. Ward, wholesale hosier, Wood-st. Sols. Ingle, Belper, and Sole and Turner, Aldermanbury.

34 20 20

201

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

89 90

86 86

93

.................

Buenos Ayres

Brazilian...................

Belgian

.......

[ocr errors]

86

91

82 83 83 831 84 96

THE GAZETTES.

952

[blocks in formation]

Brewer, H. draper, last exam. passed.- Crossling, W. draper, div. next week. Bell, London.-Groves, W. grocer, div. next week. Green, London.-Jarvis and Jarvis, wine merchants, div. next week. Green, London.-King, J. soap maker, div. next week. Turquand, London.-Moore, T. furniture broker, div. next week. Turquand, London.Redwood, E. jun. china dealer, last exam. passed.-Rolfe, W. farmer, final div. next week. Turquand, London.Trice, W. grocer, div. next week. Turquand, London. Friday, April 16.

Bartlett, C. merchant, final div. next week. Belcher, London.-Baylis, T. C. grocer, last exam. passed.-Blackford, T. horse-hair dealer, Assignee, April 23.-Bourquin, F. H. watch manufacturer, div. next week. Cannan, London.-Bowles, T. victualler, last exam. May 14.-Champness, F. draper, last exam. May 7.-Dailey and Co. leather manufacturers, last exam. May 18.-Fielder, J. W. lace merchant, last exam. June 15.-Latham, S. M. banker, div.

Bankrupts.

DATE OF FIAT AND PETITIONING CREDITORS' NAMES. Gazette, April 16, BATTERSBY, ALEXANDER WHITE, joiner and builder, Walnut-street, Liverpool, April 27, at eleven, Liverpool, Com. Perry; Cazenove, off. ass.; Chester and Co. Staple-inn, and Tyrer, Liverpool, sols. Date of fiat, April 8. Bankrupt's own petition.

BERRYMAN, GEORGE, licenced victualler, Staines, Middlesex, April 27, at two, June 1, at one, Basinghall-st. Com. Holroyd; Edwards, off. ass.; Stroughill, Coleman-st. and Richings, Staines, sols. Date of fiat, April 13. Bankrupt's own petition. BUTCHER, HENRY, poulterer, pork butcher, and cheesemonger, 46, Lamb's Conduit-street, April 23, at two, June 1, at twelve, Basinghall-st. Com. Holroyd; Groom, off. ass.; Oldknow, Chapel-st. Bedford-row, sol. Date of fiat, April 13. C. Goslett, carver and gilder, 32, Southmolton-st. Oxford-st. pet. cr. ELSTONE, CHARLES, linen draper, Guildford, Surrey, May 3, and June 7, at eleven, Basinghall-st. Com. Shepherd; Graham, off. ass.; Jones, Size-lane, Bucklersbury, sol. Date of fiat, April 5. G. Howes, W. Cook, W. Cook, jun. F. Cook, W. Hockin, and E. Featon, warehousemen, St. Paul's Churchyard, pet. crs. ELLIS, JOHN, ale and porter brewer, 49, Castle-st. Bristol, April 29, at twelve, May 27, at eleven, Bristol, Com. Stephen; Acraman, off. ass.; Bishop, Lincoln's-inn-fields, and Henderson, Bristol, sols. Date of fiat, April 13. FEATHERSTONE, JOHN, butcher, Goole, Yorkshire, April 27 Bankrupt's own petition. and May 18, at eleven, Leeds, Com. West; Young, off. ass.; Williamson and Co. Great James-st. England, Howden, and Bond and Barwick, Leeds, sols. Date of fiat, March 50. W. Sykes, farmer, Eastoft, Lincolnshire, GERISH, FRANCIS WILLIAM, ironfounder, East-road, Cityroad, April 29, at eleven, June 7, at half-past eleven, Basinghall-st. Com. Shepherd; Turquand, off. ass.; Adams, George-st. Mansion-house, sol. Date of fiat, April 14. A. Kidd, gentleman, 3, Old Fish-street-hill, pet. cr.

pet. cr.

HEARD, DAVID, sen. smack owner, carpenter, and builder, Barking, Essex, April 22, at three, May 27, at twelve, Ba singhall-st. Com. Evans; Bell, off. ass.; Bell, Basinghall-st. sol. Date of fiat, April 13. D. Heard, jun. carpenter, Barking, and S. H. Leat, auctioneer, Romford, Essex, pet. crs.

HODGKINS, HENRY, shoemaker, Birmingham, April 27 and May 18, at eleven, Birmingham, Com. Balguy; Christie, off. ass.; Hodgson, Birmingham, sol. Date of fiat, April 7. T. Hodgkins, Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire, JAMES, SARAH, and HERBERT, THOMAS, grocers and pet. cr. general shopkeepers, Brynmaur, Llanelly, Breconshire, April 30 and June 1, at eleven, Bristol, Com. Stevenson; Miller, off. ass.; Leman, Bristol, sol. Date of fiat, April 14. Bankrupt's own petition. KNIGHT, HENRY, brewer and hop merchant, Reading, April 23, at half-past twelve, May 28, at eleven, Basinghall-st. Com. Fane; Cannan, off. ass.; Holmes, Great James-st. Bedford-row, and Clarke, Reading, sols. Date of fiat, April 7. Bankrupt's own petition. SECKEL, MEYER ABRAHAM, and BANNERMAN, HILLERY JOHN, watch manufacturers, 19, Duke-st. Aldgate, May 1, at one, June 5, at half-past eleven, Basinghall-st. Com. Goulburn; Green, off. ass.; Sydney, Liverpool-st. sols. Date of fiat, April 5. P. Phillips, 3, Castle-st. Hounds. ditch, pet. cr. STACE, ROBERT A. upholsterer, Sandgate, Kent, April 23, at twelve, May 28, at half-past eleven, Basinghall-st. Com. Fane; Cannan, off. ass.; Waller, jun. Finsbury circus, sol. Date of fiat, April 5. G. and W. Bartholomew, hearth-rug manufacturers, Pavement, Finsbury, pet,

crs.

SYMES, JOHN DAVID, corn and coal dealer and scrivener, Axminster, Devonshire, April 29, at one, May 19, at eleven, Exeter, Com. Bere; Hernaman, off. ass.; Stogdon, Exeter, and Keddell and Co. Lime-st. sols. Date of fiat, April 5. Bankrupt's own petition.

SWORD, ROBERT, draper, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, April 26, at eleven, June 3, at one, Newcastle, Com. Ellison; Wakley, off. ass.; Harle, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, and Chisholme and Co. Lincoln's-inn-fields, sols. Date of fiat, April 9. Bankrupt's own petition. TEMPERLEY, NICHOLAS, coal merchant, King William-st. City, and dealer, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, April 27, at halfpast one, May 28, at twelve, Basinghall-st. Com. Fane : Whitmore, off. ass.; Henderson, Mansell-st. Goodman's fields, sol. Date of fiat, April 15. Bankrupt's own pe tition.

BAINBRIDGE, WILLIAM, grocer, Corrie-place, Old KentGazette, April 20. road, and of Lombard-street, Chelsea, May 4, at twelve, June 1, at two, Basinghall-st. Com. Holroyd; Groom, off. ass.; Cox and Co. Size-lane, sols. BENTLEY, ARTHUR, ironfounder and machine maker, Bury, Lancashire. April 30 and May 20, at eleven, Manchester; Hobson, off. ass.; Clarke and Co. Lincoln's-inn-fields, and Messrs. Gundry, Bury, sols. Date of fiat, April 13. Bankrupt's own petition.

CHETTLE, JOHN, linen draper, Warminster and Chippenham, Wiltshire. April 27, at eleven, June 1, at twelve, Basinghall-st. Com. Fonblanque; Belcher, off. ass.; Jones, Size-lane, sol. Date of fiat, April 13. J. and W. Morley. warehousemen, Gutter-lane, pet. crs.

CowNDEN, CHARLES, boat builder 59, Fore-st. Lambeth, April 27, at two, June 1, at twelve, Basinghall-st. Com. Fane; Cannan, off. ass.; Ashby, Shoreditch, sol. Date of HERBERT THOMAS, grocer, Bridgewater, Somersetshire, fiat, April 17. Bankrupt's own petition. May 4 and 26, at eleven, Exeter, Com. Bere; Hirtzel, off. ass.; Cop, Bridgwater, Boyle, Clement's-inn, and Terrell, Exeter, sols. Date of fiat, April 15. H. C. Bussell, mariner, Bridgwater, pet. cr. M'DONNELL, MICHAEL, ship broker, Liverpool, April 13 and May 25, at twelve, Liverpool, Com. Ludlow; Bird, off. ass.; Budger and Co. London-wall, and Dodge, Liverpool, sols. Date of fiat, April 14. Bankrupt's own petition. THOMAS, HERBERT, linen draper, Carmarthen, April 27, at twelve, June 1, at half-past twelve, Basinghall-st. Com. Fane; Cannan. off. ass.; Hardwick and Davidson, Weavers'-hall, sols.Date of fiat, April 12. R. Beal, J. Greatorix, and J. Bradbury, warehousemen,, Aldermanbury, pet. crs. TOONE, EDWARD, tea dealer, grocer, and oilman, King-st. Twickenham, April 27, at half-past one, June 1, at eleven, Basinghall-st. Com, Fonblanque; Belcher, off. ass.; Donne and Taylor, New Bread-st. sols. Date of fiat, April 16. Bankrupt's own petition. WIGHTMAN, ROBERT, draper, Colchester, Essex, April 30 and June 12, at eleven, Basinghall-st. Com. Goulburn; Green, off. aff.; Cattlin, Ely-place, sol. Date of fiat, April 14. J. Thompson, warehouseman, Watling-st. pet. cr.

Meetings at Basinghall-street.

Gazette, April 16.

Banks, W. C. builder, Lee, May 8, at one (adj. March 27), last exam. and aud.-Boddington, J. corn, hop, and provision dealer, May 7, at half-past twelve, final div.-Cooper, W. hardwareman and haberdasher, May 7, at twelve, final April 30, at one, proof of debts.-Dyke, M. J. innkeeper, div.-Davies, J. P. apothecary, Davies-st. Berkeley-square, Romsey, Hants, May 10, at one, div.-Elworthy, J. B. draper, Bridgwater, May 7, at eleven, aud.-Gammage T. 22, King-st. Seven Dials, and Mott, J. 30, Broad-st. Bloomsbury, cheesemongers, May 7, at eleven, joint div. and sep. of Mott.-Gass, J. draper, Colchester, Essex, May 8, at twelve, div.-Goulty, J. mast maker, Stangate and Bankside, May 11, at eleven, aud.-Howe, E. J. china dealer, 3, Elizabeth-place, High-st. Deptford, May 10, at half-past twelve, div.-Llewelly, J. H. surgeon, Strand, May 8, at 219, Blackfriars-rd. May 7, at twelve, div.- Parsons, J. twelve (adj. March 20), last exam.-Parnall, W. clothier, Medway-st. Horseferry-rd. May 7, at eleven, aud.-Pritchett, S. and Oridge, J. P. glove manufacturers, drapers, and grocers, Charlbury, Oxfordshire, May 7, at twelve, final joint and sep. divs.-Proctor, C. wine merchant, Witham, Essex, Quincey, W. tin-plate worker, Old-st. May 17, at eleven, May 8, at eleven (adj. March 20), last exam. aud. and div.aud.-Stone, M. J. grocer, Abidgdon, Berks, May 10, at twelve, div.-Ternan and Ternan, builders, Polygon, May 1, at twelve (adj. March 27), last exam.-Willis, J. eatinghouse keeper, May 7, at eleven, aud.

MEETINGS FOR ALLOWANCE OF CERTIFICATES. Goulty, J. mast maker, Stangate and Bankside, May 11, at eleven.-Stone, M. J. grocer, Abingdon, May 10, at twelve. Gazette, April 20.

Armann, P. and Christ, J. G. foreign and general merchants, 4, Mark-lane, May 13, at twelve, div.-Bradley, S. corn factor, Mark-lane, May 12, at twelve, aud.

Meetings in the Country.
Gazette, April 16.

Burns, W. draper, grocer, wine, spirit, and beer retailer, Ehyl, Flintshire, May 7, at twelve, Liverpool, final div.Calliet, P. leather dealer and commission agent, Manchester, May 10, at twelve, Manchester, aud. and May 11, at twelve, div.-Clarke, T. assistant victualler, Cheltenham, May 7, at eleven, Bristol, aud.-Cook, E. tailor, Dursley, May 7, at one, Bristol, aud.-Edersheim, R. draper, Manchester, May 10, at twelve, Manchester, aud.-Farley, F. W. hatter, Liverpool, May 7, at eleven, Liverpool, aud.-Hornby, B. innkeeper, Hoylake, Cheshire, May 7, at twelve, Liverpool, div.-Illingworth, M. Smith, W. and Wright, J. worsted spinners and worsted manufacturers, Bradford, Yorkshire, May 11, at eleven, Leeds, aud. and May 13, at eleven, div.Jones, L. merchant, Liverpool, May 7, at twelve, Liverpool, aud.-Lord, J. tanner, Sheffield, May 7, at ten, Sheffield (by adjt.), last exam.-Lupton, T. and W. B. flax spinners, Leeds, Yorkshire, May 11, at eleven Leeds, joint aud. and sep. of T. Lupton, and May 13, at eleven, joint div. and sep. of T. Lupton.-Maw, W. builder and contractor, Birkenhead, Cheshire, May 7, at eleven, Liverpool, aud. and May 10, at eleven, div.-Smith, J. victualler, Liverpool, May 7, at eleven, Liverpool, aud. Smith, J. licensed victualler, Brownlow-hill, Liverpool, May 11, at eleven, Liverpool, final div.-Watson, W. victualler, Birkenhead, May 7, at eleven, Liverpool, aud.-Wilkinson, C. M. wine, spirit, and beer merchant, Ulverston, Lancashire, May 10, at twelve, Manchester, aud. and May 11, at twelve, fur. div. MEETINGS FOR ALLOWANCE OF CERTIFICATES. Bookless, W. ironfounder, Liverpool, May 7, at eleven, Liverpool.-Cook, E. tailor, Dursley, May 7, at one, Bristol. -Skinner, W. victualler, Burslem, May 11, at half-past eleven, Birmingham. Gazette, April 20.

Charles, H. commission agent and sharebroker, Manchester, May 13, at twelve, Manchester, aud. and May 14, at twelve, div.-Copner, H. mercer and draper, Ludlow, Shropshire, May 13, at twelve, Manchester, aud. and May 20, at twelve, div.-Dawson, B. woollen manufacturer, Buersill, near Rochdale, May 13, at eleven, Manchester, aud. and May 20, at eleven, div.-Fenwick, B. linen draper, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, May 11, at twelve, Newcastle, fur. div.-Gaunt, R. rape dust merchant and farmer, Ingmanthorpe, Kirk Deighton, Yorkshire, May 11, at eleven, Leeds, aud. and first div.-Gribbon, W. glass dealer, Leeds, May 20, at eleven, Leeds, aud.-Hall, J. share broker, printer, and stationer, Rochdale, May 13, at one, Manchester, aud. and May 20, at one, div.-Heaton, J. clothier, Park, near Honley, Almondbury, May 11, at eleven, Leeds, aud. and first and final div.-Marsland, H. silk throwster, Hazelgrove, within Bosden, Chester, May 11, at twelve, Manchester, aud. and May 12, at twelve, div.-Miller, W. manufacturer and commission agent, Manchester, May 13. at twelve, Manchester, aud. and May 20. at twelve, div.Oulton, J. corn dealer, Ashton-under-Lyne, May 13, at eleven, Manchester, aud.-Prince, J. grocer, Cloxhoe, April 29, at half-past ten, Newcastle (adj. April 15), last exam.-Robinson, W. dyer, Saddleworth, May 14, at eleven, Leeds, aud.-Thompson and Mellis, merchants, Newcastle, and of Buenos Ayres and Monte Video, May 11, at twelve, Newcastle, aud. of Mellis.

MEETINGS FOR ALLOWANCE OF CERTIFICATES. Fairhurst, T. B. painter, Liverpool, May 11, at twelve, Liverpool.-Hawke, N. T. tea dealer, Penzance, May 13, at one.-Ireland, R. H. victualler, Nottingham, May 21, at eleven, Nottingham.-Pierce, J. builder, Liverpool, May 12, at eleven, Liverpool.-Taylor and Hawkey, ship builders, Monkwearmouth Shore, May 11, at one, Newcastle, as to Hawkey.

Partnerships Bissolbed.

Gazette, April 13.

Barsham, T. and Cooper, H. R. surgeons, Ixworth, Nov. 8, 1845. Debts paid by Barsham.-Biertumpfel, H. and Clark, C. T. candle mould manufacturers, Albany-street, Regent's-park, April 12.-Birtwistle, I. and Ashworth, E. fulling millers, Bury, Feb. 9.-Child, S. and S. B. rectifiers, Trinity-st. Newington, Dec. 24, 1844.-Creed, G. and Kilner, J. surgeons, Bury St. Edmunds, April 7. Debts paid by Kilner-Crowther, B. and Hirst, W. cloth dressers, Huddersfield, April 7. Debts paid by Hirst.-Ellen, J. Cookson, J. and Coulthard, T. alkali manufacturers, Heworth, Sept. 3.-Evans, J. and Martin, W. provision merchants, Red Lion-place, West Smithfield, April 12.-Cibbs, J. B. and Clark, W. T. tea urn manufacturers, Great Sutton-st. Aug. 10.-Glover, J. and Shepheard, W, jun. dyers, Liverpool and Manchester, April 9. Debts paid by Glover.-Hall, R. Gorton, T. Lilley, T. and Rothwell, T. cotton spinners, Tottington Lower-end, April 7, so far as regards Lilley.-Hall, R. Gorton, T. and Lilley, T. dealers in dye-woods, Totting. ton Lower-end, April 7, so far as regards Lilley.-Harris, E. and Banks, T. malsters, Wolverhampton, Sept. 29. Debts paid by Banks.-Holtham, W. and Cooke, J. H. grocers, Gloucester, March 23. Debts paid by Cooke.-Hunt, T. and J. brewers, Banbury, March 25. Debts paid by T. Hunt.-Kirk, T. and S. (deceased), cotton spinners, Staleybridge, Feb. 16, 1845.-L'Enfant, J. A. and Bragg, G. F. lithographic printers, High Holborn, April 8. Debts paid by L'Enfant.-Lomas, W. and Shimwell, I. worsted spinners, Salford and Haslingden, April 8. Debts paid by Shimwell.-Maltby, C. and Catlow, B. painters, Bradford, April 8.-Miles, T. and Palmer, E. bead manfacturers, Queen-st. Finsbury, April 12.-M'Leod, L. Starkie, E. and Jones, R. ship brokers, Liverpool, Jan. 1.-Phillips, J. and Slack, E. F. attorneys, Chippenham, April 2. Debts paid by Phillips.-Pierce, W. and Kolle, H. W. ironmongers, Jemyn-st. April 10. Debts paid by either partner.-Rooke, C. and Mead, T. J. grocers, Canterbury, March 13.-Rowell, T. and Richardson, J. timber merchants, Hartlepool and New Middleton, April 6.-Russell, W. and C. attorneys, Leamington Priors, July 1.-Worthington, B. and Birming. ham, J. hotel keepers, Dover, April 6,

MEETING IN THE COUNTRY. Wood, J. sen. coach proprietor, Chorlton-upon-Medlock, May 10, at twelve, Manchester, aud. and May eleven, at twelve, first div.

Gazette, April 16. Leeds.-Normington, S. waterman, Mirfield, April 21, at Allen, J. Cookson, J. and Coulthard, T. alkali manufac-eleven, Leeds.-Smith, F. out of employ, St. Michaels, April turers, Sept. 3.-Bates, E. and Walkington, J. stockbrokers, 29, at eleven, Bristol.-Townend, J. and Moulding, A. waste Leeds, March 31.-Blake, H. and King, S. A. dressmakers, dealers, Bradford, April 20, at eleven, Leeds.-Turner, J. Junction-terrace, Edgware-road, March 19.-Bruce, N. and worsted manufacturer, Halifax, April 27, at eleven, Leeds, Wyld, G. publishers, Farringdon-street, April 15.—Burton, -Wilkinson, B. out of business, Bradford, April 21, at J. and Smallfield, G. newspaper proprietors, Leicester, eleven, Leeds.-Wrighton, T. engraver, Birmingham, April April 13.-Camp, J. and D. builders, Waltham-cross, April 22, at eleven, Birmingham. 9.-Chilver, T. F. and Brown, W. apothecaries, New Burlington-st. March 31.-Contencin, J. and Clark, H. lithographic artists, Pancras-lane, March 29. Debts paid by Clark.- -Green, R. and Whitaker, L. brewers, Salford, April 14. Maunder, R. and Hitchcock, W. M. woollen manufacturers, Debts paid by Whitaker.-Hitchcock, F. M. South Molton and Exwith, March 8, so far as regards F. M. Hitchcock.-James, E. L. and Wadham, F. G. stationers, Queen-street, Cheapside, April 16.-Lane, W. and Wilcox, C. N. general merchants, Gracechurch-st. April 12. Debts Townley, W. coachmaker, Little James-street, Bedford. paid by Lane.-Mills, J. and Chavasse, B. Ettingshall Col- row.-Hoole, H. F. grocer, High-street, Southwark.-Tate, liery, Staffordshire, April 15. Debts paid by Chavasse.-R. silversmith, Rezent-street.-Brooks, C. carman, VineMussen, J. and Nunneley, J. brewers, Burton-upon-Trent, yard, Lant-street, Surrey.-Peake, R. farmer, Bury, HertApril 12.-Nevins, P. and Lawton, R. J. surveyors, Man- fordshire.-Shuker, W. licensed victualler, Salisbury.chester, April 13. Debts paid by Lawton.-Pashley, T. and Pickstone, R. grocer, Manchester.-Jones, J. grocer, LianPlevins, C. H. builders, Birmingham, April 14.-Stephen, gefni, North Wales.-Bell, M. E. and J. news-vendors, G. and Hutchinson, B. W. attorneys, Furnival's-inn, April Finch-lane, Cornhill.-Walker, W. grocer, Woolwich.15.-Vine, P. and Langley, E. H. haberdashers, Liverpool, Oakes, T. wine and spirit dealer, Walsall, Staffordshire.April, Debts paid by Vine.-Williamson, W. and R. Wilks, J. L. tailor, Worcester.-M'Donnell, M. shipbroker, and Gaskill, R. hat manufacturers, Stockport, April 12. Liverpool.-Shepherd, J. and B. wine and spirit merchants, Debts paid by Messrs. Williamson. Exeter. Bradly, W. sen. innkeeper, Kirby Lonsdale.Lee, J. cabinet-case maker, Sutton Coldfield, Warwicks) ire.

Insolvents

Petitioning the Courts of Bankruptcy.
Gazette, April 13.

PETITIONS TO BE HEARD AT BASINGHALL-
STREET.

From the Gazette of Friday, April 23. Bankrupts.

ADVERTISEMENTS.

BRITANNIA LIFE ASSURANCE COM

PANY, 1, 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 in ample subscribed capital, and the large fund accumulated from the premiums on upwards of 6,000 Policies.

King, H. clerk, Brand-st. Blandford-sq. April 29, at eleven.-Laughton, J. J. in no business, Hatton-garden, April 29, at eleven.-Morton, M. J. assistant to a civil engineer, Wilmington-sq. Pentonville, April 20, at eleven.-M. Shane, A. J. gent. Upper George-st. Bryanstone-sq. April 16, at half-past one.-Needham, W. R. publican, Ratcliffe, April 20, at eleven.-North, W. clerk, Portsea-place, Connaughtsq. May 6, at eleven.-Ranwell, E. clerk, Garlick-hill, April 22, at half-past twelve.-Ratcliffe, G. clerk, Hampton-place, Half the amount only of the annual premium required Camden-town, April 22, at eleven.-Sherborne, G. C. white during the first five years, the remaining half premiums being smith, Margaret-terrace, Paddington, May 6, at eleven.-paid out of the profits, which, after five years, will be anSmith, C. milkman, Hampton, April 22, at half-past twelve. nually divided among the Assured. Todd, J. inspector of the Great Western Railway Company, Reading, April 20, at eleven.-Walmsley, J. engraver on wood, April 20, at half-past eleven.-Watkins, A. watch maker, Ashby-st. St. John-st.-rd. April 20, at half-past eleven.-Webb, W. pewterer, President-st. East, April 22, at eleven.-Willamant, J. cattle dealer, Great Yarmouth, April 20, at twelve.-Woolcombe, H. shipping agent, Peckham and Cornhill, April 20, at twelve.

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 Debts.

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.

Whole Term of Life.

PROPRIETARY BRANCH.

MUTUAL ASSURANCE

BRANCH.

Half Pre- Whole Pre

Half Pre-Whole PreAge. mium first mium after Age. mium first mium after 5 years. 5 years. 7 years. 7 years. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d.

PETITIONS TO BE HEARD IN THE COUNTRY. Bayley, T. jun. coach maker, Congleton, April 22, at ele- Annual Premiums required for an Assurance of 100%. for the ven, Liverpool.-Bell, J. D. out of business, Hull, April 28, at ten, Hull.-Blackburn, J. out of business, Leeds, April 27, at eleven, Leeds.-Brear, G. grocer, Wakefield, April 27, at eleven, Leeds.-Charlton, W. beer retailer, Huddersfield, April 27, at eleven, Leeds.-Elworthy, J. out of business, St. George, April 19, at one, Exeter. -Ford, J. green grocer, Standon, April 22, at eleven, Birmingham.-Fortune, W. out of business, Wakefield, April 27, at eleven, Leeds.Groom, S. land surveyor, Whitchurch, April 21, at one, Birmingham.-Hartley, M. sen. grocer, Blackburn, April 20, at twelve, Manchester.-Homar, B. butcher, Birmingham, April 20, at eleven, Birmingham.-Jackson, T. black beer brewer, Leeds, April 27, at eleven, Leeds.-Murphy, P. general dealer, Newbridge, April 23, at eleven, Bristol.Orerend, J. hawker, Bradford, April 27, at eleven, Leeds.Suddards, R. wool sorter, Bradford, April 27, at eleven, Leeds.-Thomas, T. mason, Newton, April 23, at twelve, Bristol.-Thornton, J. slater, Eccleshill, April 27, at eleven, Leeds.-Truelock, J. grocer, Manchester, April 22, at twelve, Manchester.

MEETINGS IN THE COUNTRY.
Salt, F. farmer, Wootton Wavern, May 5, at eleven, Bir-
mingham, aud. and May 6, at eleven, div.
Gazette, April 16.

PETITIONS TO BE HEARD AT BASINGHALL-
STREET.

Betts, S. A. grocer, East Moulsey, April 29, at eleven.Billings, D. B. farmer, Trinity-sq. Tower-hill, April 29, at twelve.-Bullen, W. grocer, Salmon's-lane, Limehouse, April 23, at one.-Dimond, S. fishmonger, Seymour-place, Camden-town, April 29, at twelve.-Hale, W. J. out of business, Regent-st. Lambeth-walk, April 22, at half-past eleven.-Hildrith, F. T. shopman to a hosier, Camera-sq. Chelsea, April 29, at eleven.-Jones, L. bookseller, Ramsgate, April 21, at eleven.-Lancaster, J. D. hair dresser, Houndsditch, April 22, at half-past eleven.-Le Jeune, A. professor of music, Red Lion-sq. and Hanover-st. Walworth, April 20, at twelve.-Pars, E. clerk, Great Marylebone-st. April 28, at eleven.-Potter, J. plumber, Weathersfield, April 22, at one.-Powell, G. plumber, Lower Belgrave-st. April 22, at half-past twelve.-Simons, J. wharfinger, Camden-wharf, Camden-town, April 22, at half-past one.-Wade, W. landscape painter, White-st. Bethnal Green-rd. April 29, at twelve.-Weller, S. S. linen draper, Chatham, April 22,

at twelve.

MEETINGS AT BASINGHALL-STREET.

236

20 25

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

1 2 9 10

[blocks in formation]

PHOTOGRAPHIC PORTRAITS at

HALF PRICE, COLOURED or PLAIN.-The Public are invited to inspect the specimens of Photographic Art, with NEW IMPROVEMENTS, at the Photographic Establishment, 183, Strand (between Norfolk-street and St. Clement's Church, over the printseller's shop).

Portraits by this system can be finished in Oil or Water Colours by a sitting of less than a minute, on Ivory, Card,or Canvas, for 10s. and upwards; combining the truth of the Daguerreotype with the life-like colour and expression of Nature.-Satisfactory ones guaranteed.

Hours from Ten till Four o'clock.

[ocr errors]

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 secure it. How fearful is illness, and who have we to blame for it but ourselves? Physie is one evil to cure another, 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 how to obtain the former, and remove the lattter, in Dr. PETITIONS TO BE HEARD IN THE COUNTRY. Culverwell's little Memoirs, called HOW to LIVE; or Allen, J. hair dresser, Leicester, April 23, at eleven Not- WHAT to EAT, DRINK, and AVOID, and as companion, tingham.-Bradley, B. labourer, Batley, April 21, at eleven, HOW to be HAPPY (the price is 1s. each; if by post, Leeds.-Bromilow, J. slater, Walton, April 23, at twelve, 1s. 6d. in stamps). They recommend no nostrum, pill, or Liverpool.-Chater, W. jun. publican, Sunderland, May 6, at balm, but render every possessor master or mistress of his or half-past ten, Newcastle.-Clanahan, A. Liverpool, April 22, her own case. They tell home truths, and detail facts that at eleven, Liverpool.-Emmott, T. out of business, Black-may astound, but which are worthy of recognition; and burn, April 20, at eleven, Leeds.-Evans, J. W. appraiser, they furthermore unmystify the laws of life, health, and Cheltenham, May 6, Bristol.-Gibson, W. joiner, Hudders- happiness, and how to live happy and contentedly is ren field, April 21, at eleven, Leeds.-Gomersal, D. manufacturer, dered clear and open to the humblest intelligence. Calverley, April 20, at eleven, Leeds.-Langmead, G. clock maker, Dartmouth, April 28, at eleven, Exeter.-Laskey, R. clerk, St. Leonard, April 28, at eleven, Exeter.-Lumley, W. jun. boot maker, Guiseley and Leeds, April 21, at eleven, Leeds.-Moore, J. cordwainer, Bradford, April 20, at eleven,

Wray, J. straw hat manufacturer, Newington-causeway, purpose, or suffer from the sorrows of an afflicted body, seek May 7, at half-past eleven, div.

147, Fleet-street; Mann, 39, Cornhill; Nalson, 457, West To be had of Sherwood, 23, Paternoster-row; Carvalho, 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.

69

70

[blocks in formation]

70

Vice-Chancellor Bruce's Court

Court of Queen's Bench

Court of Common Pleas

Court of Exchequer

71 72 75 79

83

83

84
84

84

85 85

85

Bail Court....

Circuit Reports

Judges' Chambers.

LEGISLATOR-Summary

Business of Parliament..

[blocks in formation]

... 86

Leading Articles: The County Courts Circular-Notes on County Courts Practice

and the survivor, with power of appointment to Mrs. Page Carr, which was not executed, was in trust to pay and apply the funds in question unto and for the benefit of the executors or administrators of Mrs. Carr. Mrs. Carr died first, then Mr. Carr; after the death of both of them, the testator's widow, who was entitled for life, died, and the question is, whether these funds were part of the estate of Mr. Carr; that is, whether they were part of the estate of Mrs. Carr; for, although they formed a reversionary interest, which never could fall into possession during the coverture, yet, as the husband survived, he became entitled to such reversionary interest, if it formed part of his wife's estate. The question then is, whether a gift to the executors or administrators of one of several tenants for life of a fund constitute part of the estate of such tenant for life, or is it a gift in trust for the next of kin of such person? It seems strange that this should be made a question. The title of the tenant for life was admitted and assumed in Saberton v. Skeels, 1 Russ. & M. 587, n. 1; and Walton v. Makin, 6 Sim. 148-9. It was precisely the case I had to consider in Daniel v. Dudley, supra; and although there was not a formal decision of the point, I formed and expressed a very decided opinion in the affirmative of the proposition. The Vice-Chancellor had, in that case, decided that the next of kin of the wife were entitled, founding that opinion upon what he conceived to be a clear manifestation of intention to exclude the husband, a circumstance most material if there had been expressions from which a gift to the next of kin of the wife might have been supported. Resting, as the decision does, upon this ground, it is no authority in support of the affirmative of the general proposition.

86

Courts: Northumberland-Cambridgeshire-Essex

[blocks in formation]

rity, and is most consistent with the probable intention of the testator. I am of opinion that the husband became entitled to his reversionary interest by virtue of his marital right, and that the probate and legacy duties are payable upon it as part of his estate.

Monday, December 21, 1846.
MATHEWS v. CHICHESTER.
Practice-Indulgence-Irregularity-Demurrer—
Notice.

Where a notice of filing a demurrer had been irregu-
larly served on the plaintiff, but the plaintiff by his
subsequent conduct had precluded himself from taking
advantage of it, the Court will not deprive the de-
fendant of the right to hold the bill to be out of
court, by directing such bill to be restored.
Vice-Chancellor Wigram, by an order dated the
17th of November, 1846, directed the plaintiff's bill
The
to be restored, and gave him leave to amend.
defendant, Chichester, had demurred for want of
equity and want of parties; and his solicitor, on the
day of filing the demurrer, gave notice to the plain-
tiff's solicitor that the demurrer had been filed. This
was in pursuance of the 23rd Order of the 26th of
October, 1842, which directs, "That when any soli-
citor or party shall cause any answer, demurrer, &c.
to be filed, he shall on the same day give notice
thereof to the solicitor of the adverse party, or to
the adverse party himself, if he acts in person."

The letter giving such notice was posted before five o'clock in the afternoon. The plaintiff did not set down the demurrer for argument within twelve days after the filing thereof, being the time specified by the 46th Order of May, 1845, and the bill, in consequence, was out of court. Application was made to the ViceChancellor to have the bill restored, and for leave to amend, on which occasion it was contended by the plaintiff's counsel that, in consequence of the mode in which notice was served, the demurrer ought to be taken off the file for irregularity. The Vice-Chancellor held that the plaintiff was, by his own act, precluded from taking that objection, and that the demurrer must be deemed to have been regularly filed, but ultimately made the order applied for by the plaintiff. The defendant now moved to discharge that order.

K. Parker and Willcock, for the defendant, mentioned Calvert v. Gandy, 1 Phil. 518; Lloyd v. Loaring, 6 Ves. 773.

Romilly and Grove, for the plaintiff, supported the order of the Vice-Chancellor, and cited Wellesley v. Wellesley, 4 M. & Cr. 554; Dalton v. Hayter, 9 Jur. 674; Hannam v. South London Waterworks Company, 2 Mer. 61.

JUDGMENT.

So far, therefore, from that case being an authority 93 for the affirmative of the general proposition, it decided that the addition of the words "of his own family" did not prevent the gift to the executors or administrators of the husband taking effect as a gift to himself. In Bulmer v. Jay, supra, both the learned judges who decided that case, but particularly Lord Brougham, founded their opinion upon particnlar terms and provisions of the settlement, as controlling the ordinary and natural meaning of the words. Daniel v. Dudley (1 Beav. 46), was cited as favourable to the claim of the next of kin; but so far as it is applicable at all to the present question, it is an authority against it. The The LORD CHANCELLOR.-The Court sometimes decision of the Master of the Rolls assumed that the grants indulgence to parties not consistent with the reservation after a life estate to the wife, to her exe- strict rules of practice, yet in such cases the party cutors, administrators and assigns, gave the property seeking indulgence must always make out a special to her surviving husband, but that it was controlled reason to induce the Court to depart from its ordiby the husband's covenant to settle all the wife's pro-nary course. The question is, whether such special perty for the benefit of her next of kin. Thus it ap- reason exists in this case. The plaintiff cannot shew pears in all cases in which the next of kin have been that there was any irregularity in the filing of the deheld entitled, the decision has proceeded upon a sup- murrer, for the Vice-Chancellor has held that the posed intention derived from peculiar terms and pro- demurrer was regularly filed, and there is no appeal visions of the instrument controlling the admitted from that decision. All the relief which the plaintiff ordinary and legal meaning of the words used. Whe asks is founded upon the assumption that the demurrer ther in all these cases there was sufficient evidence of was regular, and that the bill was in consequence out such intention is immaterial for the present purpose, of Court. The ground of irregularity being absent, for all the cases assume that without evidence of such there is nothing to justify the Court in departing from intention the next of kin would not be entitled. I its ordinary practice, and taking from the defendant must observe, however, that such evidence ought to the benefit he is entitled to from its rules. He is be very strong to justify a construction inconsistent entitled to have his demurrer deemed sufficient, and with the ordinary and legal meaning of the words the bill dealt with accordingly. The point of notice used. That such cases may exist cannot be doubted, being out of the case, the defendant was regular and for the words being only the means through which the the plaintiff irregular in his proceedings. The order meaning is conveyed, it is immaterial what words are of the Vice-Chancellor must therefore be discharged. used if we are sufficiently informed what meaning they are intended to bear; but the actual probability that the author of the instrument intended that the words used should be understood according to their ordinary and legal meaning, is so strong that slight circumstances connot be considered as sufficient evidence of a contrary intention. Too easy a departure from the ordinary meaning leads to uncertainty, and tends to make every case the subject of speculation as to the testator's intention. In the present case the testator might have had one of three objects: first, to give it to the executors or administrators of Mrs. Carr, for their own use and benefit; or secondly, his trust for his next of kin; or thirdly, to Mrs. Carr herself, or rather to throw it into her estate. The first is the most improbable; the second not much less so; and if that had been his intention he would scarcely have taken this method of effecting his pur. pose. But if, as appears to have been the fact, Mrs. Carr was the object of his bounty, what can be more natural than that after providing for the life estate, and giving to Mrs. Carr all the powers over the fund necessary to secure the enjoyment of property by a married woman, he should give to her all that might not be exhausted by those other provisions. The construction which I put upon this instrument will preserve the ordinary legal meaning of the words used, is in accordance with the great weight of autho

An information had been filed in this case against Mrs. Malkin, the defendant, for payment of double probate and legacy duties, under the following circumstances:-Thomas Brand, by his will, bequeathed 12,000l. to trustees, upon trust for his wife for her life, and after her decease, in trust, for his sister, Mrs. Carr, and her husband, during his life, and to the survivor of them during his or her life, with remainder upon trust, "to and for the benefit of Mrs. Carr's executors or administrators." Mrs. Carr died in the lifetime of her husband, who took out no administration to her effects; and Mr. Carr died in 1838, leaving Mrs. Malkin his only child, to whom he bequeathed all his property, and appointed her executrix. Mrs. Brand, the first tenant for life, lived till 1841, so that the interests of Mr. and Mrs. Carr never came into possession. Mrs. Malkin obtained letters of administration to Mrs. Carr's will. Under these circumstances, it was contended on the behalf of the Crown, that double legacy duty was payable. Mrs. Malkin, on the other hand, contended that, being the administratrix of Mrs. Carr, she took as a person designated in the will of the original testator Brand.

Romilly and Maule, for the Attorney-General, cited Daniel v. Dudley, 1 Phil. 1; Bulmer v. Jay, 4 Sim. 48, and 3 Myl. & Keen, 197; Holliday v. Clarkson, 2 Hare; Allen v. Thorpe, 7 Beav. 72. Tinney and Gardner, for the defendant, cited Smith v. Dudley, 9 Sim. 125; 36 Geo. 3, c. 52, s. 12; Sanders v. Franks, 2 Madd. 147; Wallis v. Taylor, 8 Sim. 241; Platt v. Routh, 3 Beav. 257.

Romilly, in reply, cited Attorney-General v. Drake, 10 Cl. & Finn.; Godolphin v. Duke of Marlborough, 2 Ves. 61; 53 Geo. 3, c. 108, s. 20.

[blocks in formation]

Wednesday, January 13. BRISTOW v. NEEDHAM. Practice-Receiver-Defence of action. Though a receiver, who has defended an action without having first obtained leave of the Court so to do, will not usually be allowed his costs, the Court, under particular circumstances, allowed the receiver the costs of defending an action of trover in which he had been successful, as the costs of the defence had not exceeded such as would have been authorised by the Court.

The only point of importance in this petition which involved many objects, is fully stated in the Lord Chancellor's judgment.

The LORD CHANCELLOR. -The circumstance that this petition is incumbered by a quantity of matter which is perfectly irrelevant, and with respect to which I can exercise no jurisdiction at all, is confessed very properly by Mr. Rolt in his reply in this case. The only tangible matter for my consideration is so much of the prayer as seeks to discharge an order by which the costs of the receiver in defending an action of trover brought by Colonel Needham had been ordered to be allowed to him, and the costs of applying to this Court for an injunction to prevent Colonel Needham from proceeding in an action of debt; and the question is also as to the direction for the

payment of a balance of 481. in respect of the former receiver out of the money in the hands of the present receiver.

Now, with regard to the action of trover, certainly the receiver adopted a course that he was not justified in doing-that is to say, so far he was not justified in doing so, for, by adopting it, he ran a very great risk to himself, that if that action had failed, or any expense incurred to the estate arising out of the course he pursued, the Court would never have indemnified him for the costs so incurred, inasmuch as in that case the estate might have been protected from those costs if he adoped the line of duty which it is incumbent on a receiver to follow. If the possession which the receiver holds of any description of property under the order of the Court is assailed by any other party by acts of violence or litigation, it is the duty of the receiver to come to this Court and to take the direction of the Court as to what course he should take in the case of any such hostile proceedings. In the present case the receiver did not do so; he defended the action, and the plaintiff in that action was defeated, and the costs were to be paid by the party so failing; and so far as these costs were capable of being recovered against the party so failing, they should be recovered; but it is a question whether he might or might not be able to recover those costs from the plaintiff of the action of trover. It appears that a portion, if not all, of these costs could not be recovered, or had not been recovered, against the plaintiff, Colonel Needham ; and the receiver ask, that out of the funds in Court which are the property of Colonel Needham, except so far as they are liable to prior charges, he may be paid those costs. Now, in considering that case, and with reference to the authorities referred to in the 5th of Simons, I do not find any thing in that case at all inconsistent with the view I take

of the present case. In every case of that sort the Court will enquire whether any unnecessary costs have been incurred by the receiver in adopting a course he ought not to have pursued; and if the Court finds no additional costs have been incurred, it would not be very just against the receiver to punish him by making him pay those costs which, if he had taken the right course, must have fallen on the estate. If the receiver had applied to the Court for his protection on one or two causes, the Court would have adopted it, and either would have had an enquiry, referring it to the Master to enquire whether it would be advisable to defend the action and direct the receiver to defend it, or it might have restrained the party from proceeding in the action at all. Then it must have been accompanied by an enquiry as to the validity of the claim made by the plaintiff in the action of trover, both of which proceedings must have occasioned costs, with respect to which the receiver would have been entitled to be indemnified out of the funds in court, so far as he was not able to recover them against the party, the plaintiff, in the action of trover. I am satisfied that there must have been more costs incurred than were incurred by defending the action of trover, inasmuch as in both cases the plaintiff failed, and the defendant had the benefit of the right to recover, in an action against the plaintiff, those costs. In the case in the 5th of Simons, the Court seems to have done what I think it was the duty of the Court to do, and enquire into the present conduct of the receiver. There, it was quite obvious the whole costs had arisen from the improper act of the receiver; he had done that which he had no authority to do, and he had done that act from which all the subsequent litigation proceeded, and therefore that came within the rule laid down, that if the costs are occasioned by the improper act of the receiver, he must pay the costs, and he cannot go to the estate to be indemnified. If he can shew additional costs had been incurred by the course he pursued, then the estate is not prejudiced, although he had done that which was irregular to the prejudice of himself; and it is no reason why he should not be indemnified out of the estate those costs which must necessarily have come out of the estate, whatever course he might have taken. I think the Vice-Chancellor exercised a sound discretion in allowing him the costs of the action of trover which he has not been able to receive from the plaintiff in that action. With regard to the costs of the application for the injunction, I think it has been fairly argued that he has done exactly what he ought to have done. An action of debt is brought against him in respect of his proceedings of receiver, and he applies to the Court to know what he ought to do, and the Court restrains the action of debt. Then he asks the Court to pay him the costs and expenses incurred by that application, and those the Court has allowed him. This is not to be considered his order, and he must have the costs of maintaining it. This Court is not to lay down a rule that, if an action is brought against the receiver, the receiver must take his chance of defeating the plaintiff, or if he comes to the Court to ask the direction of the Court, that he, the receiver, is to bear the expense of coming here. That cannot be meant, and I think Mr. Rolt did not press his argument against that part of the order. Then the other part of the order

that no

is with respect to the Master's certificate allowing
the balance due from a receiver out of the money in
the hands of the present receiver. Nobody questioning
the correctness of that balance, and there being no
proceeding to dispute it, it may or may not be a
proper balance; but that is not the mode in which
the propriety of the Master's certificate is to be
questioned. The Master has certified to the Court
that the former receiver had a balance of 481. and all
that part of the order does is to direct the present
receiver, out of the money in his hands belonging to
the estate, to pay that certified balance; and there
are no proceedings to question that balance; there
are no proceedings which the Court can look at for
the purpose of questioning that balance which is
found due. That is the whole of the order, and I
think on all these points the Vice-Chancellor has
exercised a sound discretion, and has made a very
proper order, and that therefore this petition should
be refused with costs.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

priety-Jurisdiction.

The question merely of the irregularity of an order of
course, obtained at the Rolls in a cause attached to
any of the Vice-Chancellor's Courts, and not ils
impropriety in respect of the merits, can be con-
sidered on a motion to discharge at the Rolls.
Where notice of motion to dismiss a cause attached to
one of the Vice-Chancellor's courts for want of pro-
secution was given, but before the hearing the plaintiff
obtained an order of course at the Rolls to amend,
and also an order to sue in forma pauperis, the
Vice-Chancellor thought he could not make the order
to dismiss while the order of course to amend was
in operation; and the defendant therefore moved at
the Rolls to discharge the order to amend for irre-
gularity, but the order being regularly, though pos-
sibly very improperly, obtained, was nevertheless
sustained.

It being stated that there were merits, and if the
matter were properly investigated, it would appear
that the order was very improperly obtained, con
sidering the conduct of the parties, the Master of
the Rolls seemed to contemplate the possibility of
giving relief indirectly. The defendant might bring
the case upon the merits before the Vice-Chancellor
for his consideration, and then, on the footing of
his judgment in respect thereof, apply at the Rolls ;
but, quære, whether that course would be adopted?
The Lord Chancellor can take into consideration
both the regularity and propriety of an order of
course, because of his wider jurisdiction; and may
therefore discharge an order at the Rolls, sustaining
an order of course, though both orders may be very
proper.

This was a motion to discharge an order of course
to amend, for irregularity. The bill was filed on the
23rd of July, 1846, in the Vice-Chancellor of Eng-
land's Court. On the 2nd of December the joint an-
swer of three of the defendants, Richard, John, and
Samuel Arnold, was put in; and on the 5th of the
same month William Tugwell and Lydia his wife put
in their answer. The other defendants had not ap-
peared nor answered. The last answer put in on
the 5th of December became sufficient on the 29th of
January, and the time for obtaining an order to
amend expired on the 26th of February. On the 6th
of March a notice of motion to dismiss the bill for
want of prosecution was served for the 9th of March;
but it appeared on the same 6th of March an order
of course to amend had been obtained by the plaintiff,
and also an order to sue in forma pauperis, and the
Vice-Chancellor thought that rendered it impossible
for him to proceed on the motion to dismiss.

Hare now moved to dismiss the order of course to amend, for irregularity, and cited Myers v. Weatherall (V. C. E.). The remaining defendants had not ap. peared, and may therefore be considered not to be parties; therefore the last answer was four weeks in before the order of course was obtained.

Elderton, contrà, contended that the order of course was within the terms of the General Order which gave a right to amend within a certain time after the last of the answers was put in; and he would stand upon the strict terms of the Order.

dered. I am willing to consider the point of discharging the order on the foundation of the ViceChancellor's judgment, that there is something improper in the conduct of the parties which disentitles them to the order. The Chancellor has a wider jurisdiction, and hence it has happened that he has made an order discharging my order, sustaining an order of course, and yet both orders were right on the footing on which they were made.

Re TAYLOR.

Practice-General orders-Delivery of bill of costs-
Order for time.

By the 12th of the General Orders of the 26th of
August, 1841, every order or decree requiring any
party to do an act thereby ordered shall state the
time within which it is to be done, and a memoran-
dum in the form thereby directed shall be en-
dorsed on a decree. This Order only applies to par-
ties in a cause; and therefore, where an order was
made for taxation of a solicitor's bill of costs for
business done out of Court, and for delivery of docu-
ments upon payment of what should be found due,
and the bill was taxed and paid, and the solicitor
refused to deliver the documents, an order was made
to deliver them, but without limiting a time.

The executors of a deceased testator employed Mr. executorship, the business done being all out of court. David Taylor as their solicitor in the matters of the Mr. Taylor having delivered his bill of costs, the executors on the 9th of February last obtained an order to tax, and for the delivery up to them of all documents, &c. due. The bill was accordingly taxed on the 16th of on payment to Mr. Taylor of what should be found February last, and 97. 28. the sum found due, was paid, but Mr. Taylor refused or neglected to deliver

up

the papers.

Taylor to deliver them; and asked the Court to limit
Rogers now applied for an order directing Mr.
a time, as, under the 12th Order of the 26th of August,
1841, he believed, that was necessary.
The MASTER of the ROLLS.-No; the Order only
applies to parties in a cause, not to a person such as
this, or in a case where there has been nothing done
ask it; but I cannot, for I understand the opinion of
in court. I wish I could have made the order as you
a higher authority than mine is that the Order only
applies to parties in a cause.

Wednesday, March 31.
HARRISON v. HARRISON.
Practice-Appearance-Substituted service-Solicitor
for one purpose is not so for all.

A solicitor who is referred to by a defendant in the
cause as his legal adviser (for one purpose) is not so
generally for the purpose of substituted service upon
him of the subpana to appear and answer, he having,
when applied to, denied that he had authority to

appear.

Shapter applied to the Court for an order that service of the subpoena to appear and answer upon Mr. Pyne, a solicitor, should be deemed good service on Mr. Harrison, a defendant in the cause. It appeared that the bill was filed by Mrs. Harrison, a married woman, on the 22nd of March instant, to enforce the provisions of certain marriage articles. Mr. Grant, the

solicitor of the plaintiff, had, on the 20th of October, 1846, written to Mr. Harrison, the defendant, then residing in the county of Roscommon, in Ireland, informing him that "legal arrangements were necessary" as to Mrs. Harrison's property, and requesting to be referred to his legal adviser. Mr. Harrison, by letter dated the 23rd of October, replied that he had inclosed his (Mr. Grant's) letter to Mr. Pyne, a professional gentleman residing in the neighbourhood of London, who would communicate with Mr. Grant. Accordingly, Mr. Grant, some time after, wrote to Mr. Pyne, to say he intended to file a bill, and Mr. Pyne replied he had no authority to appear; but if Mr. Grant had no objection, he would like to see a fair copy of the bill, and Mr. Harrison would wait in town. [The MASTER of the ROLLS.-Then he was in town; did you ask where he was to be found?] We did not, as we did not expect to see him; we said, as Mr. Harrison is in town he may accept service, but there was no reply. He cited v. Horton, V. C. E.; Murray v. Vipart, 1 Phil. 521. The MASTER of the ROLLS.-I don't think I can

make the order; you want a little more before it can

be done.

COURT.

Jan. 29 and 30.
LUDGATER v. CHANNELL.

Hare, in reply.-Every person having a life interest has answered; the others have not appeared, VICE-CHANCELLOR OF ENGLAND'S and therefore have no intention to prosecute the suit. The whole time is gone, and we may stand here for ever if this be allowed. There are merits. The MASTER of the ROLLS.-I cannot hear them. The ground here is the irregularity of the order, and Receiver-Recognizances-Representations of Receiver. I cannot take the impropriety of conduct, if such there be, into account, without going into the merits of the case; and this I have no jurisdiction to do in any cause which is attached to another branch of the Court. It appears to me that there ought not to be an order of course to amend in this case, but then the matter ought to be brought before the Vice-Chancellor before whom the cause is, and by him consi

In order to fix the recognizances of a receiver, it is first necessary that the Master should ascertain the amount of the balance due from the estate of such receiver; for the Court has no power in the first instance to order summarily the representative of a deceased receiver to bring in and pass the receiver's accounts. cause for leave to put a receiver's recognizances in This was a petition by some of the parties to the

« PreviousContinue »