Page images
PDF
EPUB

this, which had lately occurred within his own experience.

Easter Term 1860.

Fairbank v. Green

[merged small][ocr errors]

Bickford and another v. Binning
Watkins v. Shepherd

[ocr errors]

The health of "The Secretary" having been London drunk with great enthusiasm,

Bedford

Mr. BARNES returned thanks. He had spared no exertion to promote the well-being of the society, and the results showed he had not been unsuccessful. He hoped that increased exertion by all present would make their next report still Norfolk more gratifying. He proposed the health of "The Agents of the Society," for which Mr. Busи returned thanks.

Surrey

Matthews v. Gibbs and others

Thompson and others v. The North-
Eastern Railway Company

[ocr errors]

Barry v. Shipley

Kopetzky v. Rudhall

Coleman v. Howard
Wright v. Wilkin

Jolly . The Wimbledon and Dorking
Railway Company

Stansfield and another v. Dyer

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

Potter v. Fellows

Durham
Mr. York ....

The customary toast, "To our next merry meeting," concluded a very gratifying day. Quatreman was congratulated on the excellence of the dinner and wines provided by him on this occasion.

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

Reg. on the prosecution of the Guar-
dians of the Strand Union (resps.);
The Churchwardens of St. Giles's-in-
the-Fields (apps.)

Reg. v. The Inhabitants of Fletton
Reg. on the prosecution of F. Worship
and others (resps.); R. J. Harrod (app.)
G. Embleton (app.); H. Brown (resp.)
G. Woolley (app.); James Carbishley
(resp.)

G. W. Tomlinson (app.); James Car-
bishley (resp.)

W. Hayes (app.); J. A. Stephenson (resp)

Thomas Doick (app.); Alexander Phelps
(resp.)

W. S. Till (app.); T. Walker (resp.) ........ H. Hill (app.); Samuel Thorncroft (resp.) Eliza Clements (app.); Amos Smith (resp.)

West Riding, Yorkshire Warwickshire

T. Thewlis (app); H. R. Kay (resp.)
Reg. on the prosecution of W. Wheel-
wright . W. K. R. Bedford and
another, justices

Staffordshire...... Reg on the prosecution of the Church-
wardens, &c., of Rushton Spencer
(resps.); The North Staffordshire Rail-
way Company (apps.)

Cambridge........ Reg. on the prosecution of the Churchwardens, &c. of St. Michael (resp.); H. Smith (app.)

Liverpool
West Riding, York-
shire

A. B. Steel (app.); John Hamilton (resp).

Charles Walker (app.); William Well-
born (resp.)

Newcastle-on-Tyne Reg. v. The Inhabitants of Els wick
West Riding, York-

shire

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

Reg. v. The Rev. A. B. Wrightson, clerk.

Mark Loom (app.); John Bailey (resp.)
Reg. v. The Lords, &c. of Romney-marsh
Reg. on the prosecution of the Church-

wardens, &c., of Tewkesbury (resp.);
The Severn Navigation Commissioners
(apps.)

Reg. . The Inhabitants of the parish of
St. Marylebone

Worcestershire.... The Right Hon. William Baron Ward

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

(app.) Jeremiah Thomings (resp.)

NEW TRIAL PAPER.

Michaelmas Term 1858.

Lyle v. Richards and others. (Stands
over till decision of the Court of Error
in Reynolds v. Buckley)

Michaelmas Term 1859.

[merged small][ocr errors]

Goode v. The South Wales Railway Com-
pany. (Stands over-plaintiff dead)
Hilary Term 1860.

Elwes v. Christopher. (Part heard)
Zwilchenbart and others v. Alexander
Simpson v. Young and another. (Stands
over till the case of Suddes v. Balleny
is reached)

Margetson and another v. Atkin

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

Coggin v. Levy

[ocr errors]

Lowenthall. Regnejo.

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

Ashworth v. Stanwix and another
Suddes v. Balleny

Ward . The Albert Life Insurance
Company

Jan Pickard v. Pilkington and others
Pickard v. Isaac and others

Dickenson and another v. Breffit
Mitchell v. Ackroyd and others
Baxendale v. Proctor

Niemann v. Moss and others

Wiley, Crawford and another
Powell v. Hall

Flesher v. Trotman and others

Reg. v. The Inhabitants of Brailsford
Symes v. Hutley

Court for Divorce and Matrimonial Causes. Cases to be heard before the Full Court for Divorce and Matrimonial Causes, at Westminster, on the 28th May 1860 and following days.

Evans . Evans, part heard; Pritchard v. Pritchard; Jones v. Jones, further hearing; Boddy v. Boddy and Grover; Kitchen v. Kitchen and Hall, part heard; Styrin v. Styrin and Hiley; Beezley v. Beezley and Graham; Maycock v. Maycock and Norton (otherwise Lorton); Deck v. Deck; Whittall . Whittall and Hunt; Withers v. Withers and Jenkins; Kirby v. Kirby and Taylor; Paine v. Paine; Furness v. Furness; Robinson v. Robinson and Gamble; Fisher . Fisher and Fenner; Fisher v. Fisher; Minter v. Minter; Mawds ey v. Mawdsley; Shedden and Shedden v. the Attorney-General, and Patrick and Patrick (cited to see proceedings); Stoate v. Stoate; Day v. Day and Doney; Irvine v. Irvine and Gill; Bond. Bond: Dolby Dolby and Hewitt; Simpson v. Simpson and Chipman; Yeats v. Yeats and Wortham; Sutton . Sutton and Earp; Gardner v. Gardner; Caig v. Caig and Webb; Thomas v. Thomas; Cook v. Cook; Taplin v. Taplin; Barron v. Barron and Bishop; Jaquier v. Jaquier; Ferguson v. Ferguson; Netley e. Netley and Simmons; Dixon v. Dixon; Gaines v. Gaines and Hayes; Gutteridge v. Gutteridge; Millard v. Millard; Rogers v. Rogers and Halmshaw; Savory v. Savory; Heath v. Heath and Longley: West v. West and Pennefather; Bellewe. Bellew and Eden; Horton v. Horton; Rose v. Rose and Gibbs; Case v. Case; Corbett v. Corbett and Sadlier; Frebout v. Frebout and Penny; Silcock v. Silcock and Luxon; Williams v. Williams and Crispin; May . May and Pearce; Sims v. Sims; Smith v. Smith and Liddiard; Sheppard v. Sheppard; Simpson v. Simpson; Latham v. Latham and Gethin; Catt

Cole and others v. Denny and another ling v. Cattling and Crowhurst; Linzee v. Linzee; Page v.
Shrubb v. Eyre

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Deane v. Lofthouse

Blech v. Ballaras

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

Evison v. The Oxford Worcester and
Wolverhampton Railway Company

Dorset v. Muff

Thomas v. Rogers

Davies v. Bowen

Evans v. Thomas

Adshead v. Needham and another
Hall v. Crawford and another
Tried during Term.
Middlesex. ...... Noble v. Le Gros

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

Cohen and Ux. v. De Maillepree
Payne v. Revans

Romillio v. Hallham

Lloyd v. Shaw

Stevens v. Taylor

Cook and others v. Wright

SPECIAL PAPER.
Standing for Judgment.

Hodgson and others v. Hooper and others. Special case
Trinity Term 1860.-For Argument.

Page and Barnes; Matthews v. Matthews (appeal); Haden v. Haden and Cope; Gill v. Gill; Pulman v. Pulman and Tatham; Kavanagh v. Kavanagh and Moss; Nursey v. Nursey and Tucker; Peter v. Peter and Blackney; Burt v. Burt; Bradbury v. Bradbury and Botterill; Taylor v. Taylor and Field; Harrison v. Harrison; Wright v. Wright and Bowen; Charlton v. Chariton and Baker; Chaddock v. Chaddock; Johnson v. Johnson; Cullum v. Cullum; Waddington. Waddington and Berry; Gray v. Gray; Tapp v. Tapp; Porter r. Porter; Moon v. Moon; Brewerton v. Brewerton and Woodley; Fithian v. Fithian and Lockwood; Phillips v. Phillips and Fox; Starkey v. Starkey and Irwin; Stringer v. Stringer and Stringer; Pope v. Pope and Blow; Foster v. Foster and Hale; Rowland v. Rowland and Peacock; Allan . Allan and Marcovitz; Harris v. Harris and Bond; Sirr r. Sirr; Alpenny v. Alpenny . Alpenny; Waterhouse v. Waterhouse and Bennett; Cox v. Cox; Gurney . Gurney and Taylor; Robertson v. Robertson, Worth v. Worth and Marchant; Cotterell v. Cottereil; Tilling. Tilling; Graham v. Graham and Griffiths; Hanson v. Hanson; Newton t. Newton and Cook; Bevan (falsely called McMahon) v. McMahon; Lautour . Lautour

Harrison v. The London, Brighton and South Coast Railway and Weston; Winstone v. Winstone and Dine; Malbon v.
Company. Speelal case

[blocks in formation]

The Company of Proprietors of the Warwick and Birming-
ham Canal Navigation . The Oxford, Worcester and
Wolverhampton Railway Company. Demurrer. (Case in
the enlarged paper (crown side) to come on for argument
with this demurrer).

Smith. Mundy. Special case

Sichel v. Watson. Demurrer. (To stand over until after
the defendant shall have pleaded to the amended decla-
ration)

Christmas v. The London and South-Western Railway Com-
pany. Demurrer

Evans v. Attwood and another. Demurrer
Shrubb v. Eyre. Demurrer

Castrique v. Behrens and others. Demurrer
Schlumberger v. Lister. Demurrer

Giles v. Scott. Appeal from County Court
Bosanquet v. Heath. Demurrer
Heath v. Bosanquet. Demurrer
Jackson v. Saxon.

Demurrer

Saunders v. Eppe. Special case

Sinclair v. The Maritime Passenger's Assurance Company.
Special case

The Hungerford Market Company v. The City Steamboat
Company (Limited.) Special case
Hewson v. Xenos. Demurer
Molesworth v. Quayle. Special case
Custance v. Bester. Special case
Somerville v. Jenkins. Demurrer
Clapham v. Langton. Demurrer
Sommerville v. Mirehouse and another. Demurrer
Fergusson v. Humfrey and another. Demurrer
ENLARGED RULES.

Malbon; Jones v. Jones and Nicholls; Wykes v. Wykes and Green; Robarts v. Robarts and Herdman; Chabot v. Chabot; Williams v. Homfray (falsely called Williams); Depledge v. Depledge and Goldsall; Rogers v. Rogers; Thom s v. Thomas; Norris v. Lawson and Mason; Cubley. Cubley and Smith; Rose v. Rose and Cokely; Boynton v. Boynton; Elliott v. Elliott; Sturge v. Sturge and Mellis; Cumberland v. Cumberland and Robyns; Humphrey v. Humphrey and Abrahart; Wayman v. Wayman; Alldridge v. Alldridge and Damant; Ager v. Ager; Barrett v. Barrett; Hipperson v. Hipperson; Hawkes v. Hawkes; Comyn v. Comyn and Humphreys; Smith v. Smith; Stretton V. Stretton;

Mortimer v. Mortimer; Padmore v. Padmore and Taylor; Simcoe. Simcoe and Russell; Mills v. Mills; Milner v. Milner; Linstead v. Linstead; Brown v. Brown and Bedson; Walker v. Walker; Redfern v. Redfern, Balfe, and Brown; Lewis v. Lewis; Davis v. Davis and Lynch; French v. French and Willoughby; Brown v. Brown and M'Glone; Hitchcock v. Hitchcock; Shipcott v. Shipcott; Croswaithe v. Croswaithe and Dalton; Hart v. Hart; Pell v. Pell; Brodie v. Brodie.

ARCHES COURT.

The following sitting days have been appointed :-Wednesday, June 6; Wednesday, June 13; and Wednesday, June 20.

ADMIRALTY COURT.

This court will sit at Westminster on Fridays, May 25, and June 1st, 8th, and 15th; it will, at half-past 10, take summonses and motions in chambers, and assignations in causes instituted prior to January 1, 1860; and at 11 am. motions in court, and "in pœnam causes. The court will hear causes on the Thursdays, Fridays and Saturdays, and, in case of need, on Mondays and Tuesdays, between Thursday, May 24th, and Saturday, July 7th, both inclusive.

[ocr errors][merged small]

Reg. v. Wm. Herford, Esq., coroner
Reg. v. The Mayor, &c. of Devonport
Reg. v. The Lords of the Committee of H. M. Privy Council May 23rd and 30th, and June 6th and 13th, at half-past ten,
for Trade, &c. and the Warwick and Birmingham Canal
Company. (To come on with demurrer on special paper.)

[blocks in formation]

(The judges who took their seats in this court on the first day of this term, were COCKBURN, C. J., WIGHTMAN, CROMPTON and BLACKBURN, JJ.)

REG. v. THE MAYOR, &C. OF DEVONPORT.-Phinn, QC. moved for leave to read affidavits on the hearing of the rule herein, although they had not been filed within the proper time.-M. Smith, Q.C. and Prentice contra. Granted.

MITCHELL V. HORNE.-Tried before Wightman, J. in London: verdict for plaintiff for 1081. 6s.-Aspland moved for a new trial, on the ground that the verdict was against evidence. Rule nisi. Re ARBITRATION BETWEEN POTTER AND EDWARDS.-Hanc moved for an attachment for nonpayment of money pursuan Granted. to award. HICKSON v. BUSCH.-Tried before Wightman, J. in Middlesex: verdict for plaintiff for 1001-Hawkins, Q.C. moved for a new trial, on the ground that the verdict was against evidence, and the damages excessive. Rule nisi.

Ex parte LORD HUNTINGTOWER.-Hannen moved for a certiorari to remove a record and conviction thereon by the justices of Richmond, in Surrey. Certain tressels having been placed on parts of the road between Richmond and

Petersham, Lord Huntingtower determined to try the right
of the surveyor of highways to place them there, drove
against and upset them. He then went to the police in-
spector and told him what he had done. The surveyor then
obtained a summons, under 7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 30, for wilfully
and maliciously damaging one of the tressels, and, evidence
of the damage having been given, he was fined 1s. It was
now objected that the justices had no jurisdiction, and that
three of them were vestrymen in whom the property was
laid.
Rule granted on second ground.

LUCE V. THE GUARDIANS OF THE CITY OF LONDON UNION.Phipson showed cause against a rule to show cause why the above action should not be stayed.-Lush, Q.C. (W. Williams with him) contra.

Rule discharged by arrangement and with the sanction of the court; and rule to be drawn up giving the plaintiff's judgment in default of order of Poor Law Board being performed.

BAKER V. TYNTE.-Lush, Q.C. (Joyce wifh him) showed cause against a rule to set aside two orders of Blackburn, J., dated 24th Dec. and 18th Jan. last, ordering that defendant's reversionary life-interest in certain sums of stock standing in the books of the Bank of England in the names of Mary Tate and others, should stand charged with the payment of 60001. and interest and costs, and all further proceedings be stayed.-Coleridge (Briggs, Chancery bar, with him) contra. Rule discharged.

WATERLOO v. BRAY.-Metcalfe showed cause against a
rule for a new trial obtained on the ground of surprise.-
Knowles, Q.C. contra.
Rule absolute.

Re GEO. WHITE (One, &c.)-Lush, Q.C. showed cause against a rule calling on Mr. White to answer certain matters contained in affidavits.-Griffits contra.

REG. v. HUTTON.

Rule discharged.
Part heard.

Wednesday, May 23. THE WHITBY IRON COMPANY (LIMITED) v. ROBERTS.—— Bovill moved to date a rule obtained on the 9th May for the purpose of making an agreement of reference a rule of court as of the 7th May, for the purpose of making a motion to set aside the award herein, on the ground that the umpire was the attorney of the defendant. It appeared that a motion to set aside the award was made last term, but it was found that the agreement of reference had not been made a rule of court, and so the motion fell to the ground. Owing to the agreement of reference being in the defendant's custody (the successful party), the plaintiffs were not enabled to make it a rule until the 9th May, the day after Easter Term, during which term, in the ordinary course, the motion ought to have been made: (Re Perring, 4 Dowl. 98; Re Ross, 4 Dowl. & L. 648.) Rule nisi.

REG. v. THE JUSTICES OF LINCOLNSHIRE.-The argument of Manisty in this case was continued. At its close, the Court suggested that, as the point was a very important one, and that if they decided in favour of the prerogative of the Prince of Wales, there could be no appeal, the better course would be to issue a writ of summons, and then state a special case, by which means the decision of this court might be reviewed in error. After some discussion it was agreed that the case should stand over for that purpose. Stands over.

GERARD v. Ross.-Rule nisi calling on Mr. Innes, an attorney of this court, to pay 7207. 14s. 4d. to a Mr. McAndrew, a trustee under a sequestration of the defendant in Scotland, and to stay the proceedings of outlawry against the defendant.-Shee, Serjt. and Kemplay showed cause; and Lush and Barstow supported the rule

Rule absolute without costs. MANSER V. CHRISTIE.-Rule nisi to enter verdict for the defendants on all the issues. The plaintiff is the owner of a mill and residence, and the defendants are brewers at Hoddesdon, Herts. The action was brought for polluting the water of the Wallen stream, which flowed into the plaintiff's millpond by the defendants discharging the refuse from the brewery into the stream. It appeared that the brewery had drained into the stream from time immemorial, but that no nuisance had resulted prior to 1848, when the defendants made some alteration in their drainage channels. Jacobs showed cause, and Bovill and Baddeley (H. Lloyd with them) supported the rule.

[ocr errors]

Thursday, May 24.

Re RICHARD ASHWORTH.-Wigham moved for a certiorari to bring into court the appointment of Messrs. Lingworth and Hacking, overseers of Walton-le-day, with a view to its being quashed. Granted.

HILL v. HOWELL.-J. Brown, on the part of the defendant, moved to set aside a replication of confession, and the taxation of costs thereon, under rule 22, Reg. Gen. Trin. T. 1853. There had been a sale on certain conditions; amongst others, that if the vendor pleased he might, within a reasonable time, rescind the contract without costs. chaser brought an action on the contract; and the defendant pleaded that a reasonable time had not elapsed before suit. The plaintiff treated that as a good plea, and confessed under

rule 22.

The pur

Refused.

REG. v. THE BURIAL BOARD OF ST. JOHN'S, WESTGATE, NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE.-T. Jones, on behalf of the trustees of St. Paul's Chapel, moved for a rule for a mandamus to the Burial Board of St. John's, Westgate, to maintain the fences of the burial-ground. Granted.

GOODE v. SOUTH WALES RAILWAY COMPANY.

Stands over.
BICKFORD V. THE ROYAL MAIL STEAM PACKET COMPANY.—
showed cause against a rule for a new trial on the ground of
Petersdorf, Serjt. (Webster and Hindmarch with him)
surprise.-Bovill, Q.C. (Murray with him) was not called on.
Rule absolute.
BAGSHAWE v. ROWLAND.-Pearse moved for a prohibition.
Refused.
ELWES V. CHRISTOPHER.
Part heard.

COURT OF COMMON BENCH.
Reported by DANIEL THOMAS EVANS and R. VAUGHAN WILLIAMS,
Esqra, Barristers-at-Law.

BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.

TRINITY TERM.

Tuesday, May 22.

(Before ERLE C.J., WILLIAMS, WILLES, and BYLES, JJ.)
The Court took enlarged rules, there being no motions.
RANSOME v. EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY COMPANY.-
Bovill, Q.C. prayed the court not to take this case to-day,
because Power, for the plaintiff, was in the H. of L.-ERLE,
C. J. Let the case be taken out of the paper and come on
as a rule.
Order accordingly.

FLETCHER AND ANOTHER V. MACDOWALL.-This case was
called on.-C. Pollock stated that he was in the case, which
was a motion to take money out of court, but had not yet
been furnished with affidavits.-ERLE, C.J.: Let the case
stand over till affidavits are ready.
Stands over.

AMANN V. DAMM.-This was a motion for a new trial. It
was an action of slander, and the question was, whether the
words spoken were privileged.-The case is fully reported.
See reports of the week.
Rule absolute.

MORGAN v. TAYLOR.--This was a special case. It was an
action to recover a cargo of coals.-M. Smith and Maude for
the plaintiff. It was part heard last term.

Judgment for defendant.

BAILEY. SWEETING.-This cause was tried before the
Lord Chief Justice on the 12th instant: verdict for the de-
fendant.-Hawkins now moved to set aside the verdict, and
to enter a verdict for the plaintiff for 481. 10s. 6d. It was an
action for goods sold and delivered, and for goods bargained
appeared, had bought some looking-glasses which were
and sold. The defendant, an upholsterer at Cheltenham, it
second-hand, as a ready-money transaction, from the plain-
tiff, a looking-glass manufacturer, and had then purchased
some other goods on the same occasion. The looking-glasses
were broken in the carriage, and the defendant refused to
accept them, but accepted the other goods. It was con-
tended for the plaintiff that the transaction was all one, and
that acceptance of a part bound the whole. For the de-
fendant it was contended that there were two distinct trans-
actions, and as the first was not in writing, and for more
than 10, and he had refused to accept, he was not liable.
The plaintiff relied on a letter from defendant to him, dated
3rd Dec. 1859, as a sufficient memorandum in writing to
satisfy the Statute of Frauds.-ERLE, C.J.: The jury, in fact,
believed the defendant. The goods were entered in one
entry in the plaintiff's books. I put it to the jury as strongly
as I could that it was all one transaction, ending in the
order of the goods. The jury, nevertheless, found that
there were two contracts. You may take a rule.
LOCKWOOD V. LEVICK.-This was an action for commission
Pule nisi.
at 2 per cent. on the sale of a large quantity of elastic web
sold by the plaintiff for the defendant on the terms, "We ex-
pect our commission on all goods bought by houses through
us," contained in a letter from the plaintiff to the defendant.
whether the goods were delivered or not, the commission
The action was tried before Byles, J. The jury found that
was due by the custom of the trade. The goods, it appeared,
though sold, were not at the time manufactured, and the
defendant was unable to deliver them, and it was contended,
therefore, that no commission was due. A rule having been
obtained to set aside the verdict, Manisty, Q.C. and C. Pollock
showed cause.-Parry. Serjt. supported the rule.-EKLE,
C.J. was of opinion that the rule must be discharged. The
learned judge who tried the cause was not dissatisfied with
the verdict, and on the evidence he concurred with him.
The COURT thought the learned judge's ruling at the trial
correct, that "goods bought " might extend to a contract to
buy where an order had been given and accepted, and here
the agreement between the plaintiff and defendant was,
"We expect to receive our commission on all goods bought."
The other learned judges concurred.-(The case will be duly
reported.)
Rule discharged.

REG. . THE JUSTICES OF SHEFFIELD, re THE APPEAL OF HENRY WHITTINGTON.-C. Foster moved for a rule for a mandamus to the justices of Sheffield, commanding them to issue their warrant for the amount of costs due to Henry Whittington, under the following circumstances:-Henry Whittington was summoned before the justices on the 27th July for not supporting his wife, when he proved that she had committed adultery, and it was decided that he was not bound to support her; thereupon James Ellis, the assistant overseer, took out a second summons, on which Whittington was convicted, the justices not being satisfied with the evidence. Whittington appealed, and the sessions quashed the conviction, and in their judgment ordered that James Ellis, the assistant overseer, the complainant before the justices and the real respondents in the said appeal, should pay to the clerk of the peace the costs of the said Henry Whittington, to be taxed, &c. On application to the clerk of the peace it appeared that he had not received the amount, and on application to the mayor for a warrant of distress, he refused on the objection being taken that the order for payment of the costs should have been on the overseers, and not on their agent. MANSER V. CHRISTIE.-Jacob was heard further herein. Rule nisi. Rule absolute for new trial. WREN . THE EASTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY COMPANY.Parry, Serjt. (Woolett with him) showed cause against a rule to enter verdict for defendant on the second count.-Barnard contra. Rule absolute without costs.

WARD V. NAPIER.-This cause was tried before Willes, J., in Liverpool, at the last summer assizes: verdict for defendant. It was a case of collision. The plaintiff was owner of a steamer called the Lion, and defendant owner of another steamer called the Storm King, both plying between Liverpool and Rhyl. A collision having occurred near the latter place, the plaintiff brought his action to recover damages, but failed in it. A rule nisi for a new trial on the ground that the verdict was against the evidence having been obtained, no counsel appeared to show cause.Pickering (Holland with him) appeared in support of the rule.-ERLE, C.J.: The learned judge who tried the cause states that he is not dissatisfied with the verdict; it will therefore not be disturbed, and the rule must be discharged. Rule discharged.

[MAY 26, 1860.

FLETCHER V. MCDOWALL.-Grant stated that the affidavits
which the court required yesterday were now supplied.
Rule absolute

Serjt. and Turner showed cause against a rule for a new
POCKETT. WOOD.-ERLE, C.J. read the notes-Se
trial, on the ground of the verdict being against the evidence,
rule.
and of surprise.-M. Chambers, QC. heard in support of the
Rule discharge!

COCHER v. FENN.-This cause was tried before the Lord
Chief Justice at the sittings after Hilary Term, in West-
minster verdict for the plaintiff. It was an action on a time
policy insuring a ship.-Honyman having on a former day
obtained a rule to show cause why there should not be a
new trial on the ground that the verdict was against the
weight of evidence, and also to add a plea,-Keane now
showed cause.-ERLE, C.J.: I was most dissatisfied with the
verdict; you must therefore go to another jury. As to the
question of adding a plea of fraud, you must go before a
judge at chambers.
Rule absolute.

Wednesday, May 23.
C.J. read the judgment of the court.
WALE v. WESTMINSTER PALACE HOTEL COMPANY.-ERLE,

court

court.

MOON . TOWERS,-In the absence of any counsel appearing to show cause, Rule absolute BURTWELL. PRYCE.-T. Jones moved to make the role absolute. No counsel appearing to show cause, Rule absolute to enter a nomBINÉ KERNAN . WATERER AND ANOTHER. V. WILLIAMS, J. read the notes. No counsel appearing to show cause, EL, C.J. said the case might stand over till to-morrow. LAMING V. GOURLEY.-ERLE, C.J. read the notes. Stands over till to-morrow.

Judgment for the defendant.
OAKLEY V. OOD-DEEN.-BYLES, J. read the judgment of the
For a new trial.
OXLEY. HOLDIN.-ERLE, C.J. read the judgment of the
Rule discharged.
OXLADE C. NORTH-EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY.-S. Temple,
Q.C. showed cause against the rule, calling upon the con-
pany to show cause why an attachment should not issue
against them, for disobeying an injunction of this court.
Mr. Oxlade in person was heard in support of the rule.
Cur. adv. vult.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER. Reported by F. BAILEY and JOHN DUNBAR, Esqrs, Barristersat-Law.

BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.
TRINITY TERM.

Tuesday, May 22.

MOSTYN . BROOKS.-An action for slander tried before Bramwell, B.: verdict for plaintiff, 501. damages-T. J moved, pursuant to leave reserved, to set aside the verit and enter it for the defendant, or a nonsuit, or a new tria the verdict being against the evidence.

Rule nisi on the grounds that the words were not actua able, damages too large, and verdict not warranted iş the evidence.

WATSON V. BENNETT.-Huddleston showed cause against a rule obtained to set aside the award, on the ground that it was not made in time, and more than one month after the last attendance before the arbitrator, and after the autho rity of the arbitrator had expired.-Gray, contra, in support of the rule.-The COURT thought the matter too doubtful to set the award aside, nor should it be enforced by attach ment, and intimated that it must be enforced, if at all, by action, should the parties be so advised.

Rule discharged; question of costs reserved.

THE ANGLO-FRENCH PORCELAIN COMPANY (LIMITED) € HARRIS.-John Simon (C. Leigh with him) showed cause against a rule obtained calling on the company to show cause why the share register of the company should note rectified, by entering thereon the name of a Mr. Wed instead of that of the defendant, such ratification to b date and be deemed to have been made on the 22nd p 1859, and that plaintiff's pay to defendant the costs of the action under the 19 & 20 Viet. c. 47, s. 34, and 20 & ¥ ¥2 c. 14-H. T. Cole in support of the rule-The Corrif they decided in favour of the defendants, the matter wh be final; but the question was much too doubtful tasto determine it-the register of shareholders was not concesive evidence of the holder of the shares, calls upon which had been sued for, that there were not in fact sufficient mate rials before the court on which to determine it such, or whether the whole of the capital had been subscribed t &c., &c. The Court would not interfere without a necessity necessity. for it, and here at present there did not appear any Ch Rule discharged; costs to be costs in the cause. JESSEL V. CHAPLIN AND OTHERS.-Borill, Q.C. and Quis until next term, and that defendants have until that time to showed cause against a rule obtained to stay all proceeding perform their undertaking.-Lush and Jos. Brown in support of the rule.

Proceedings to be stayed for three months, on teras agreed to.

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

Differences arose, and the plaintiff summoned the parties before the justices, when an objection was there apprenticeship; it had been retained by the attorney we taken that the plaintiff had not executed the indenture of prepared it; the plaintiff then called upon him and requested to be allowed to sign it; the defendant had in the mean time also called and desired that he should not b allowed then to execute it; and consequently the plaintiff was not permitted to execute. An action was then brought by the plaintiff against the defendant upon the indenture for breach of covenant. The case was tried in London before Bramwell, B., when a verdict was found for the plaintiff, and a rule nisi was afterwards obtained to show cause why the verdict found for the plaintiff should not be set aside and entered for defendant on first and second pleas, on the master, no action would lie upon that instrument by the ground that the indenture, not having been executed by the master, and also on the third plea, as the facts showed that the instrument was delivered as an escrow; on the trover and detinue counts, as the evidence showed that those pleas should be found for the defendant; and on the issues on the 2nd, 10th and 11th pleas, as the evidence showed that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to sign; and that defendant did not prevent the plaintiff from so doing; or to reduce the verdict as the court should direct; or a new trial, as the verdict was against the weight of evi dence.-Gray and Scotland showed cause against the rule for the plaintiff.-Huddleston, Q.C. and Robinson, contra, were stopped in argument.-The COURT said the parties having agreed that the court should determine whether the indeature was an escrow or not, the case need proceed no further; as the court were of opinion that the deed was, under the circumstances, an escrow merely, and upon that point therefore the rule should be absolute. Rule absolute

RIGBY AND OTHERS v. CORPORATION OF BRISTOL.-Tried in Middlesex, before Martin, B., when the plaintiff was nonsuited. The plaintiffs, who were contractors, sued the cor poration for money claimed, extra their contract, for cutting off the round point in the river Avon. The question in dispute was, whether they were entitled to charge the costs incurred by them in removing the muddy accumulations been effected by them as part of their contract. A re deposited by the tide, or whether such removal ought to have having been obtained to set aside the nonsuit, and for a new trial, Karslake and Norman showed cause; Sir F. Slade and Maude in support of the rule.-The COURT were of opinion, upon the facts of the case, that the nonsuit was right. Rule discharged.

NAL OF AUCTIONS, ESTATES AND INVESTMENTS.

REPORTS OF SALES.

e Reports of the Estate Exchange are officially supplied to wing list. Auctioneers whose sales are registered there to by forwarding similar reports of their own sales.

IN LONDON.

WILLIAM BROWN (of Tring), at the Mart.-Freehold and state, known as Bourne End Farm, in the parishes of Hemel 1, Bovingdon, Chesham and Northchurch, Herts, comprising with kitchen-garden, numerous outbuildings, five cottages Ir. 1p. of arable, pasture and wood land, let on lease at 3251. -sold for 93004. The timber and tellers to be taken by the at the sum of 7121. Freehold estate, known as Whelpleyadjoining the above, in the parishes of Chesham and Northerts, comprising farmhouse, three barns, stabling, sheds, cart-lodge and granary, &c., with 180a Or. 22p. of arable, asture and wood land, let at 1804. per annum--sold for 7500L, Freehold estate known as Hampstead Farm, Ashleyesham, Herts, comprising farmhouse, stabling cart-lodge everal barns, three cottages, &c., with 337a. 2r. 22p. arable, and wood land, let on lease at 35 4 per annum-sold for he timber to be taken by the purchaser at 21304 Freehold Manor Farm, Waddesdon, Bucks, comprising farmhouse, outbuildings and 243a. Or. 30p. of arable and grass land 82004. Timber to be taken at 604

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

3.

. (under 10007.)

er Bills, 10001., 1fd.

do. 5004., 13d.

do. Small

jd.

[blocks in formation]

10sa 5sa 10sa

6sa 10sa 8sb 4sb 43b 9sb 9sa 8sb 8sb 8sb 8s b

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

106 1061 106 106 106 1068

..

yrs. exp. April 5, 1885 17,5,

a Discount.

:::

[ocr errors]

97 97

102 103

107 106

[blocks in formation]

174

[ocr errors]

Premium.

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

OUIS, boot manufacturer, Great Cambridge-street, Hackneyune 1, at half-past eleven, June 29, at twelve, BasinghallOff. as. Cannan. Sol. Burr, Paternoster-row. Petition, WILLIAM WATKIN, draper, Cardiff, June 5 and July 3, at , Bristol. Off. as. Miller. Sols. Davidson, Bradbury and Co., r's-hall; and Bevan, Girling and Press, Bristol. Petition,

HENRY, timber merchant, Maidenhead, June 4, at half-past July 9, at two, Basinghall-street. Off. as. Pennell. Sol. nan, Walbrook-buildings, city. Petition, May 21. ON, JOHN STRETTON, builder, Nottingham, June 7 and 26, at ast eleven, ottingham. Of. as. Harris. Sols. Parsons and Nottingham. Petition, May 18.

R, EDWARD, builder, Northampton, June 4, at half-past one, , at one, Basi nghall-street. Off. as. Pennell. Sols. Linklaters ackwood, Walbrook. Petition, May 19.

FREDERICK, baker, Tottenham-court-road, Kingsland-road, Isewhere, June 5, at two, July 3, at one, Basinghall-street. . Lee. Sol. Hilleary, Fenchurch-street. Petition, May 17. JOHN RAY, grocer, Whitehaven, May 31 and July 18, at e, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Off. as. Baker. Sols. Griffith and ton, Newcastle-upon-Tyne; and Musgrave, Whitehaven. PetiMay 19.

[ocr errors]

ND, THOMAS, manufacturer of hosiery, Rheidol-terrace, ton, May 31, at half-past one, June 28, at two, BasinghallOff. us. Bell. Sols. l'arker and Lee, St. Paul's-churchyard. on, May 21. ON, GEORGE VERNON, commission merchant, New BroadJune 5, at one, July 3, at twelve, Basinghall-street. Off. as. ards. Sol. l'erry, Guildhall-chambers, Basinghall-street. PetiMay 10.

A, FRANCIS AUGUSTUS, and GREENE, MATTHEW CHARLES, ng-glass manufacturers, Hatton-garden, May 30, at half-past ve, June 27, at two, Basinghall-street. Off. as. Graham. Sols. rence, Smith and Fawdon, Bread-street, Cheapside. Petition, Y, JOHN, contractor, Liverpool and Peterborough, May 29 and 25, at eleven, Liverpool. Off. as. Morgan. Sols. Neal and in, Liverpool. Petition, May 18.

18.

ON, PAUL, bootmaker, Hythe, Kent, June 8, at twelve, July 6, even, Basinghall-street. Off. as. Cannan. Sols. Walters and Basinghall-street. Petition, May 21.

AM, WILLIAM, dealer in foreign fancy gocds, late of Cannont west, city, May 30, at half-past one, July 3, at twelve, nghall-street. Off. as. Graham. Sol. Speyer, Broad-streetdings. Petition, May 19.

Gazette, May 25.

ALEXANDER DALRYMPLE, and BRASSERT, EMIL, trimming ufacturers and importers, No. 7., Goldsmith-street, city, June 7, leven, July 9, at twelve, Basinghall-street. Com. Goulburn. as. Pennell. Sols. Lawrance, Plews and Boyer, Old Jewrymbers, Old Jewry. Petition, May 22.

E, JONATHAN, Silversmith, watchmaker, jeweller and ironnger, Helston, Cornwall, June 8 and July 4, at one, Exeter. n. Andrews. Off. as. Hirtzel. Sols. Plomer, Helston; and Clarke, ter. Petition, May 24.

, STEPHEN, grocer, cheesemonger and draper, Farningham, nt, June 5, at half-past two, July 3, at half-past one, Basinghallset. Com. Holroyd. Off. as. Edwards. Sols. Nichols and Clark, ok's-court, Lincoln's-inn. Petition, May 21.

TEE, WILLIAM, ship joiner and carpenter, No.'80, Three Colt-street, nehouse, June 6, at half-past one, July 4, at twelve, Basinghallet Com. Fonblanque. Off. as. Graham. Sol. Strong, Jewineet, Cripplegate. Petition, May 25.

SON, JOIN, and GILMAN, CHARLES SUCKLING, boot and shoe tors, manufacturers and merchants, Redcross-street, Barbican, ckney-road-crescent, Hackney-road; and Norwich, June 5, at ven, July 5, at twelve, Basinghall-street. Com. Evans. Off. as. ll. Sols. Linklaters and Hackwood, Walbrook. Petition, May 22.

MCSWINEY, EUGENE, merchant, No. 150, Fenchurch-street, June 4, at half-past eleven, July 16, at twelve, Basinghall-street. Com. Goulburn. Off. As. Bennell.' Sols. Reyroux and Bromehead, Cannonstreet. Petition, May 19.

PARKER, GEORGE HYDE, grocer and teadealer, late of No. 185, Highstreet, Southwark, June 6, at half-past twelve, July 3, at one, Basinghall-street. Com. Fonblanque. Off. as. Graham. Sols. Walter and Moojen, Southampton-street, Bloomsbury. Petition, May 15. PERRY, MICHAEL, passe-partouts manufacturer, 11 and 12, Bloomsbury-market, Oxford-street, June 8, at two, July 6, at one, Basinghall-street. Com. Fane. Off. as. Whitmore. Sol. Levy, Henriettastreet, Covent-garden. Petition, May 24. ROBBINS, ALFRED, builder, Newport, Monmouthshire, June 5 and July 3, at eleven, Bristol. Com. Hill. Off. as. Miller. Sols. Blakey, Newport; and Henderson, Bristol. Petition, May 23. SEXTON, HORACE WATLING, builder, bricklayer and carpenter, St. Andrew's-hall-plain, Norwich, June 7, at one, June 28, at eleven, Basinghall-street. Com. Evans. Off. as. Johnson. Sols. Storey, Featherstone-buildings, Holborn; and Mendham, Norwich. Petition, May 21. TOOTAL, FREDERICK HENRY, wine and spirit merchant, Cooperstreet, Manchester, June 26 and 29, at twelve, Manchester. Com. Jemmett. Off. as. Hernamar. Sols. Atkinson and flerford, Manchester. Petition, May 14.

TYLER, ROBERT LUKE, wine merchant, Spalding, Lincolnshire, June 14 and July 5, at eleven, Nottingham. Com. Sanders. Off. as. Harris. Sols. Brown and Son, Lincoln. Petition, May 22. WEST, GEORGE, mast and block maker and shipowner, No. 265, Wapping, June 5, at half-past one, July 3, at two, Basinghall-street. Com. Holroyd. Off. as. Lee. Sol. Stevens, Queen-street, Cheapside. Petition, May 21.

WILLSON, GEORGE, clock and watch maker and dealer in jewellery, Lincoln, June6 and July 4, at twelve, Kingston-upon-Hull. Com. Ayrton. Off. as. Carrick. Sols. Brown and Son, Lincoln. Petition, May 23.

WINWOOD, THOMAS, grocer and teadealer, Neath, Glamorganshire, June 5 and July 3, at eleven. Com. Hill. Off. as. Miller. Sols. Brittan and Sons, Bristol. Petition, May 9.

Dividends.

BANKRUPTS' ESTATES.

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

Ayton, C. builder, first, 2d. Edwards, London.-Barnjam, T. wine merchant, third, 23d. Edwards, London.-Bealey, R. R. and D. shirt manufacturers, third, 12-32ndsd. Hernaman, Manchester-Binns, J. soap manufacturer, first, 1d. Hernaman, Manchester.-Bircher, G. R. innkeeper, first, 3s. 4d. Whitmore, Birmingham.-Bould, W. boot and shoe maker, first, 2s. 4d. Whitmore, Birmingham.-Brentnall, G. R. coal merchant, first, 15. 101d. Lee, London. -Burkinshaw and Hudson, curriers, third, 1s. 4d. Young, Leeds - Cooper, A domett manufacturer, first, 6. 5d. Hernaman, Manchester.-Dench, F. H. carrier, first, 11. 8d. Lee, London.-Faiers, W. grocer, first, 5d. Edwards, London.-Gubb, W. ironmonger, first, 3s. 6d. Hirtzell, Exeter.Herd, J. first, 1s. 2d. Morgan, Liverpool.-Hill, C. W. anvil maker, first, 10d. Whitmore, Birmingham.-Hodges, E. boot and shoe dealer, first, 2s. Id. Kinnear, Birmingham.-Mayes, W. grocer, first, 2s. 3d. Whitmore, Birmingham.-Mayne, E. L. milliner, first, 58. Hirtzel, Exeter. Mellor aud Terras, builders, second, 11d. Hernaman, Manchester.-Moore, W. shoe manufacturer, first, 3s, 6d. Harris, Nottingham.Simpson, D. goldsmith, first, 8s. 6d. Edwards, London.-Skelton, Hill and Steinmann, first joint, 2d. Morgan, Liverpool.-Slater, H. brewer and maltster, first, 71d. Whitmore, Birmingham.-Smedley, W. grocer, second, 4d. Young, Leeds.-Smith, W. builder, first, 4. Lee, London.-Stanley, E. R. jeweller, first, 1s. 6d. Lee, London.

INSOLVENTS' ESTATES.

Hall, J. butcher, 2s. 3d. Apply at the County Court, Windsor.Sanderson, J. 1. 2d. Apply at the County Court, Whitehaven.— Shayler, E. boot and shoe maker, 28. 91d. Apply at the County Court, Windsor.

Assignments for the Benefit of Creditors.

Gazette, May 15.

Dunnell, F. licensed victualler, Murray-street, Hoxton, May 8. Trusts. J. Dunnell, gentleman, Acacia-road, St. John's-wood, and C. Pugh, wine and braudy merchant, New Park-street, Southwark. Sol. Moss, Gracechurch-street.-Flint, W. butcher, Beverley, May 5. Trusts. R. Beal, farmer, Newbald-lodge, and W. Gabbetis, butcher, Cherry Burton. Sol. Todd, Beverley.-Fotheringham, A. draper, High-street, Stepney, April 26. Trusts. J. C. Tippetts, Gutter-lane, and E. Hill, High-street, Whitechapel, warehousemen. Sols. Henson and Nicholsou, College-hill-Kates, H. hairdresser, Bristol, April 14. Trust. A. Stevens, accountant and auctioneer, Bristol. Sol. Roper, Bristol.Paul, E. nurseryman, Derby, April 19. Trusts. G. Paul, nurseryman, Cheshunt, and W. Nutting, seedsman, Barbican. Sol. Oliver, Old Jewry Chambers.-Phillips, T. tailor, Kington, May 9, Trusts. B. Wishlade, butcher, and J. Jones, baker, both of Kingion. Sol. Cheese, Kington.-Stollery, W. A. plumber, glazier and painter, Great Coggeshall, April 27. Trust. F. A. Judges, grocer and teadealer, Great Coggeshall. Sols. Stevens and Beaumont, Great Coggeshall.-Ward, 8. corn miller and grocer, Darley-bridge Mill, Derby, April 24. Trusts. S. Bradley and E. Bradley, grocers, Ashbourn. Sol. Stone, Wirksworth.-Winter, R. coal and manure merchant, Crediton, April 14. Trusts. R. Ward, St. David, Exeter, R. Stone, Taunton, T. Sully, Bridgwater, and J. W. Sully, Bridgwater and Lydney, merchants. Sol. Cleave, Crediton.

Gazette, May 18.

Barclay, J. and W. builders, confectioners and cement manufacturers, Ironbridge, Madeley, May 5. Trust. E. Edwards, gentleman, Madeley. Sol. James, Wellington and Dawley.-Gardner, E. builder, Northampton, May 4. Trust. W. Collier, shoe manufacturer, Northampton. Sol. Shoosmith, Northampton.-Nettlefold, H. corndealer and cab proprietor, New Church-street, Lisson-grove, May 2. Trust. E. Sturdy, cornfactor, Mark-lane. Sol. Sturdy, Bucklersbury.-Sparry, D. grocer and beer retailer, Westmeon, May 1. Trusts. J. Lillywhite, miller, Eastmeon, and E. Clark, grocer, Bishop's Waltham. Clark, Bishop's Waltham.-Walker, S. J. lace manufacturer, Nottingham, trading at Houndsgate, in Nottingham, and Radford, under the firm of Walker and Co., May 12. Trusts. J. F. Bottom, lace dresser,

Sol.

Standard-bill, L. A. Baillon, merchant, Nottingham, and T.Lowe, clerk,

Acton. Sols. Wadsworth and Watson, Nottingham.-Walker, T. civil engineer, Canterbury, May 4. Trusts. J. G. Drury, ironmonger, and G. Ashbec, butcher, both of Canterbury. Sol. De Lassaux, Canterbury. Deed with J. G. Drury, Canterbury.-Walton, R. finisher, Bradford, administratrix of J. Walton, deceased, May 10. Trusts. J. Eastwood, machine maker, Bradford, and A. Hamer, paper manufacturer, Horstorth, Leeds. Sols. Terry, Watson and Watson, Bradford.-Webb, M. A. (widow), Moamouth, executrix of J. Webb, jun. innkeeper, deceased, Monmouth, May 8. Trusts. P. Galindo, gentleman, and J. James, irenmonger, both of Monmouth. Sol. Galindo, Monmouth. -Windibanks, H. and Smith, J. upholsterers, Tottenham-court-road, May 7. Truts. H. R. Ellington, Watling-street, and S. Hindley, Friday-street, warehousemen, Sol. Hindley, Old Jewry-chambers.

Insolvents.

Petitions to be heard at the County Courts.
Gazette, May 15.

Bluett, E. tinner and brazier, dealer in fancy goods, and pigs, Spennymoor, Whitworth, May 25, at ten, Bishop Auckland.-Browne, D. C. professor of music, and dealer in musical instruments, Liverpool, June 6, at half-past ten, Liverpool.-Busby, J. innkeeper, Tottenham, Jeweller, Liverpool, June 6, at half-past ten, Liverpool.-Jubb, R. ship Coundon, May 25, at ten, Bishop Auckland.-Fry, M. working repairer, surveyor, and estimator, South Shields, May 24, at eleven, South Shields.-Longstaff, F. boot and shoe maker, Witton-park iron works, Durham, May 25, at ten, Bishop Auckland.-Priestley, J. perfumer and hairdresser, Huddersfield, Juue 22, at half-past nine, Huddersfield.-Sanderson, A. grocer and flour dealer, Merrington, May 25, at ten, Bishop Auckland.-Snell, J. boot and shoe maker, and grocer and provision dealer, Poole, June 19, at twelve, Poole.Taylor, B. hand-loom weaver, Golcar, June 22, at half-past nine, Huddersfield-Woolnough, J. tailor, grocer, draper, flour, meat and corn dealer, Kessingland, and Henstead, May 24, at eleven, Lowestoft.

ESTATES VESTED IN PROVISIONAL ASSIGNEE
Gazette, May 8.

Alexander, J. commission agent, Leeds; Lancaster.-Appleby, G. P. house painter and glazier, Caledonian-road; Debtors' prison.Balaam, J. in no employ, Turret-grove, Clapham; Surrey.-Betteney,

S. S. commercial traveller, Laurel-cottage, South Hackney; Debtors prison.-Bevan, R. sen. journeyman carpenter, Lefton; Devon.— Beverley, W. victualler, George-yard, Snow-hill; Debtors' prison.Boulton, T. W. out of business, Now-street-square; Debtors' prison.Brown, T. W. lithographic writer, Devonshire-street, Bishopsgatestreet; Debtors' prison.-Burgess, T. out of business, Cradley-heath. -Butler, H. jun. builder, Brighton; Lewes.-Cheetham, C. captain on half-pay R.N., Brighton; Lewes.-Christian, J. wheelwright and builder, King Swinford; Worcester.-Christmas, R. D. surgeon, Broughton; Surrey.-Coates, G. surgeon and apothecary, Bedfordsquare; Debtors' prison.-Dingley, W. N. commission and general merchant, Lozells, Ashton Manor-juxta-Birmingham; Stafford.Donaldson, T. linen and commission agent, Heiningford-cottages; Debtors' prison.-Garlick, II. out of business, Newton, Ashton-underLyne; Lancaster.-Gillard, G. dealer in boots and shoes, Bromptonroad; Debtors' prison.-Gold, T. engineer, Hockley-heath, Tamworth; Warwick.-Haigh, T. M. stationer's assistant, Upper Baker-street, Dorset-square; Debtors' prison. -Harris, J. butcher, Oxford; Oxford. -Hartley, J. T. laceman and hosier, Liverpool; Lancaster.-Hedger, G. tailor, draper and batter, Arundel; Lewes.-Heine, I. clerk to a leather merchant, George-street, Minories; Debtor's prison.-Holgate, J. traveller to a dyer, Manningham; York.-Hooman, R. L. maltster, Kidderminster; Worcester.-Lucas, S. sen. out of business, Hungerhill, Henley-in-Arden; Warwick.-Millward, J. sauce manufacturer, Hertford; Hertford.-Nathan, M. boot and shoe manufacturer, Strangeways, Manchester; Lancaster-Oates, P. labourer, Liverpool; Lancster.-Okell, T. farmer, Little Sutton; Chester-Oltmanus, F. L. merchant, City-road, and Water-lane, Thames-street; Queen's prison. -Parmiter, G. out of business. Fordington; Dorchester.-Paton, W. soda-water manufacturer, Manchester; Lancaster.-Pickett, H. out of business, Fore-street, Cripplegate; Debtors' prison.-Robinson, S. oil and colour dealer, Bradshawgate, Bolton-le-Moors; Lancaster.Rosser, J. grocer and draper, Ystalyferd, Llangwicke; CardiffSanders, T. slater and plasterer, Liverpool; Lancaster.-Sayers, G. carpenter, Pleasant-row, Wandsworth; Surrey.-Shaw, H. rope spinner, Smalley-common, Morley; Derby-Simpson, R. butcher and cattle dealer, Clitheroe; Lancaster.-Tomblin, J. shoemaker, Market Deeping; Lincoln.-Warren, T. attorney's clerk, East-street, Lamb's Coùduit-street; Debtors' prison.-Welchman, J. H. money agent, Lang. ham-chambers, Regent-street; Debtors' prison.-Wetherell, G. B. in no trade, Union-row, Peckham; Surrey.-Williams, B. out of business, Newport; Monmouth.-Yates, E. out of business, Sheffield; Lan

caster.

BIRTHS, MARRIAGES AND DEATHS.

BIRTHS.

COCKLE. On the 12th inst., the wife of James Cockle, of the Middle Temple, barrister-at-law, of a daughter.

HOWE. On the 18th inst., at 123, Cambridge-street, Pimlico, the wife of Edward R. J. Howe, barrister-at-law, of a son, stillborn. LOVELL-On the 21st inst., at 99. Camden-road villas, the wife of George Lovell, Esq., barrister-at-law, of a son. PEARSON.-On the 16th inst., at Upper Hillmarten-villas, Camdenroad, the wife of William Pearson, Esq.. of Lincoln's-inn, of a son. PHILLIPS-On the 22nd inst., at 77, Gloucester-place, Portmansquare, the wife of William Page T. Phillips, Esq., barrister-of-law, MARRIAGES.

of a son.

LIDDELL HASSELL-On the 13th inst., at the Presbyterian Manse, Sandhurst, Mr. James Liddle, son of Joseph Liddie. Esq., solicitor before the Supreme Courts of Scotland, Edinburgh, to Annie M. Hassell, youngest daughter of James Hassell, Esq., late of Carshalton, Surrey.

OAKELEY-PARSONS.-On the 16th inst., at St James's Church, Piccadilly, London, Sir Charles W. A. Oakeley, Burt, to Ellen, only child of John M. Parsons, Esq., of Angley-park, Cranbrook, and Raymond s-buildings, Gray's-inn.

PARTRIDGE-PAULL-On the 17th inst., at Charles Church, Plymouth, Charles Bolingbroke Partridge, Esq., of Sparkbrook, Birmingham, to Elizabeth Jane, third sister of 11. P. Paull, Esq. solicitor, Plymouth

PRICE-WILLIAMS.-On the 15th inst., at Coychurch, T. J. Price, Esq., B.A., of the Middle Temple, London, and Pencoed, Glamorganshire, to Mala, second daughter of the Rev. Chancellor Williams, Bassalleg.

RAWLINSON-VEREY.-On the 22nd inst., at the parish church of Willesden, Middlesex, Alfred Rawlinson, of Jehn-street, Bedfordrow, solicitor, to Fanny Louisa, only daughter of William Verey, Esq., of Kilburn.

DEATHS.

BATTY. On the 20th inst., in Stephen's-green, Dublin, Belissa, the beloved wife of Espine Batty, Esq., barrister-at-law, and daughter of the late John Smyly, Esq., Q.C.

BROWN.-On the 15th inst., suddenly, aged 63, James Brown, Esq., solicitor, and town clerk of Lymington, and registrar of the County Court, DWARKIS-On the 20th inst., at his residence, 75, Eccleston-square, aged 73, Sir Fortunatus Dwarris, Knt., F.R.S., one of the Masters of the Court of Queen's Bench, and a Bencher of the Middle Temple.

HOLDSWORTH.-On the 14th inst, at Hawthornden, Torquay, aged 79, Arthur Howe Holdsworth, Esq., of Widdicombe-house, Devon, Governor of Dartmouth Castle, and late M.P. for the borough of Dartmouth.

IRVING. On the 10th inst., at his house, Meadow-place, Edinburgh, David Irving, LL.D., formerly keeper of the Advocates Library. JARVIS. On the 20th inst., at his residence, 23, Cecil-square, Margate, aged 62, Stephen Jarvis, Esq., late of the Prerogative-office, Doctors'

commons.

MORLEY. On the 21st inst., at his residence, 35, Brompton-square, aged 45, William Hook Morley, of the Middle Temple, barrister-atlaw, second and eldest surviving son of the late George Morley, of the Inner Temple, and Brompton, barrister-at-law. TYRRELL-On the 30th ult., at Ventnor, Isle of Wight, George, third son of J. Tyrrell, Esq., Judge of the Exeter District County Court.

UNERAL EXTORTION AVOIDED.

By Executors and bereaved Relatives of deceased noblemen, gentlemen, tradesmen and others, sending in the first instance to SHILLIBEER'S ESTABLISHMENT, CITYROAD, near Finsbury-square, or No. 12, North-street, Quadrant, Brighton, instead of employing their upholsterer, or the nearest undertaker, who, not possessing the needful requirements, resort to the funeral furnishers to hire them, and consequently inflict two-fold profits. Shillibeer's system combines under one charge, to any scale of pomp or humility desired, funerals of every class, and the most varied description of conveyances, old and new style, and first-rate equipments, at charges so moderate as to defy competition. Catholic fittings from Paris. No extra charge within ten miles. A nobleman's or gentleman's funeral, including leaden coffin, from 184; professional gentlemen and tradesmen's, from 37.; artisans', 34, and upwards. Originated in 1842 to economise funeral expenses.

LAW LIFE ASSURANCE

SOCIETY,

Fleet-street, London, 10th May 1860.-NOTICE is HEREBY GIVEN, that a SPECIAL GENERAL MEETING of the Proprietors of this Society will be held at the Office, Fleet-street, London, on FRIDAY, the 8th day of JUNE next, at TWELVE o'clock at noon precisely, for the purpose of declaring a Division of the Surplus of the Assurance Fund of the Society, in respect of the five years ending on 31st December last. And Notice is hereby further given, that a Second Special General Meeting will be held at the like hour and place, on the following Friday, the 15th day of June, for the purpose of confirming the resolution which shall have been agreed to at such first meeting, in pursuance of the provisions contained in the Deed of Settlement. And Notice is hereby further given, that any person who shall have been assured by the Society for two whole years may, on the production of his policy and of the last receipt for the premium thereon, be present at such Meeting. At each of the said Meetings the chair will be taken at Twelve o'clock precisely. By order of the Directors,

WILLIAM SAMUEL DOWNES, Actuary.

[blocks in formation]

REVERSIONS AND ANNUITIES.

LAW REVERSIONARY

INTEREST

SOCIETY, 68, Chancery-lane, London. Chairman-Russell Gurney, Esq., Q. C., Recorder of London. Deputy Chairman-N. W. Senior. Esq., late Master in Chancery. Reversions and Life Interests purchased. Immediate and deferred annuities granted in exchange for reversionary and contingent interests.

Annuities, immediate, deferred and contingent, and also endowments, granted on favourable terms.

Prospectuses and Forms of Proposal, and all further information, may be had at the office. C. B. CLABON, Secretary.

SPECIAL NOTICE.

[blocks in formation]

Edward Smith Bigg, Esq.; John William Wilcock, Esq., Q.C.;
Keith Barnes, Esq.

The TWENTY-EIGHTH ANNIVERSARY DINNER
will take place at the FREEMASONS' TAVERN, Great
Lord CHELMSFORD in the
HONORARY STEWARDS.

CLERICAL, MEDICAL and GENERAL Queen-street, on TUESDAY, the 19th day of JUNE 1860,

ASSURANCE SOCIETY.-Established 1824.

All persons who effect Policies on the Participating Scale before June 30th, 1860, will be entitled at the next Bonus to one year's additional share of profits over later Assurers. Tables of Rates and Forms of Proposal can be obtained of GEORGE CUTCLIFFE, Actuary and Secretary. 13, St. James's-square, London, S. W.

COMMISSION.-10 per cent. on the first premium, and five per cent. on renewals, will be allowed to Solicitors. The commission will be continued to the person introducing the assurance, without reference to the channel through which the premiums may be paid.

ACCIDENTS of every kind and from any

cause Insured against by an annual payment of 31. to the RAILWAY PASSENGERS' ASSURANCE COMPANY, which secures 1000l. at death, or 6. weekly for injury.

ONE PERSON in every FIFTEEN of those insured is injured yearly by accident of some description.

No Extra premium for Members of Volunteer Rifle Corps.
No charge for Stamp Duty.

For Terms, Prospectuses, &c., apply to the Provincial
Agents, the Railway Stations, and at the Head Office.

This Company alone, without union or amalgamation with any other company, has paid in compensation 53,000. WILLIAM J. VIAN, Secretary. Railway Passengers' Assurance Company's Office, 3, Old Broad-street, E.C."

[blocks in formation]

INSURANCE

COMPANY, 1, Old Broad-street, London.
(Instituted 1820.)

DIRECTORS.

FREDERICK PATTISON, Esq., Chairman.
JAMES BRAND, Esq., Deputy Chairman.
Thomas George Barclay, Esq. George Hibbert, Esq.
James C. C. Bell, Esq.
Samuel Hibbert, Esq.
George William Cottam, Esq. Thomas Newman Hunt, Esq.
Charles Cave, Esq.
James Gordon Murdoch, Esq.
George Henry Cutler, Esq. William R. Robinson, Esq.
Henry Davidson, Esq.
Martin T. Smith, Esq., M.P.
George Field, Esq.
Newman Smith, Esq.
SECURITY.-The assured are protected from the liabilities
attaching to mutual assurance by a fund of a million and
a-half sterling, of which nearly a million is actually invested,
one-third in Government Securities, and the remainder in
first-class debentures and mortgages in Great Britain.

PROFITS.-Four-fifths, or Eighty per cent. of the profits, are assigned to Policies every fifth year. The assured are entitled to participate after payment of one premium.

PURCHASE OF POLICIES-A liberal allowance is made on the surrender of a policy, either by a cash payment or the issue of a policy free of premium.

CLAIMS The Company has disbursed in payment of claims and additions upwards of 1,500,000.

Proposals for insurances may be made at the Chief Office, as above; at the Branch Office, 16, Pall-mall, London; or to any of the agents throughout the kingdom.

SAMUEL INGALL, Actuary. ** Service allowed in Local Militia and Volunteer Rifle Corps within the United Kingdom.

The Rt. Hon. Lord Lyndhurst
The Rt. Hon. Lord Tenterden
The Rt. Hon. Lord Truro
The Rt. Hon. Lord Wensley-

dale

[blocks in formation]

Roundell Palmer, Esq., Q.C.
J. R. Hope Scott, Esq., Q.C.
Edwin James, Esq., Q.C.,
M.P.

W. T. S. Daniel, Esq., Q.C.
W. M. James, Esq., Q.C.
H. A. Merewether, Esq., Q.C.
Edward James, Esq., Q.C.
Montague Smith, Esq., Q.C.,
M.P.

R. Lush, Esq., Q.C.
T. W. Greene, Esq., Q C.
R. P. Amphlett, Esq., Q.C.
Mr. Serjeant Pigott
Dr. Phillimore, Q.C.
Hunter Rodwell, Esq., Q.C.
J. H. Palmer, Esq., Q.C.
W. D. Lewis, Esq., Q.C.

Mr. C. G. Dent
Mr. G. Dyson

Mr. E. D. Garwood
Mr. W. R. Ives

Mr. W. E. Jones

ACTING

W. H. Bodkin, Esq.
W. Roupell, Esq., M.P.
Mr. Serjeant H. G. Jones
Mr. Serjeant Payne
S. C. Fish, Esq.
M. Elwin, Esq.

R. Baggallay, Esq.
B Bond Cabbell, Esq.
The Hon. G. Denman, M.P.
C. Milward, Esq.
Dr. Swabey

M. A. Garvey, Esq.
B. Auster, Eq.
E. S. Bailey, Esq.
J. H. Benbow, Esq.
J. Bird, Esq.

A. R. Bristow, Esq., M.P.
D. E. Cameron, Esq.
J. Coverdale, Esq.
W. S. Cookson, Esq.
L. Crombie, Esq.
R. F. Dalrymple, Esq.
L. Desborough, Esq.
W. L. Farrer, Esq.
J.J. Glennie, Esq.
J. W. Hawkins, Esq.
J. J. Johnson, Esq.
H. Lake, Esq.

C. Lawrie, Esq.
A. J. Lee, Esq.
J. Leman, Esq.

H. R. Lempriere, Esq.
R. Maugham, Esq.
George Marten, Esq.
N. C Milne, Esq.
W. Murray, Esq., M.P.
T. Nettleship, Esq.
E. L. Pemberton, Esq.
J. Rigge, Esq.

E. W. Scadding, Esq.
C. F. Skirrow, Esq.
F. T. Streeten, Esq.
H. Sturmy, Esq.
J. Weston, Esq.
E. White Esq.
C. R. Williains, Esq.

STEWARDS.

Mr. S. W. King

Mr. J. Layton

Mr. W. Noad

Mr. G. C. Sherman

Mr. H. J. Tyler

[blocks in formation]

Just published,

A

THE NEW STAMP DUTIEL POCKET DIGEST of STAMPY including the new Act of 181, with Geney on Stamped Instruments. Fourth Edition VACHER and SONS, 29. Parliament-dire, LORD BROUGHAM ON LAW AN Now ready, Cheap edition, in fcp., 8., ORD BROUGHAM'S LAW REF or, an Analytical Review of Lord B and Bills from 1811 to the present time. Br EARDLEY-WILMOT, Bart., Recorder of Wive London: LONGMAN, GREEN, LONGMAN

Lo

THE MONTHLY LAW REPOR

MAY 1, containing full Reports of the most complete and extensive series pubõsis: was issued on Thursday, May 3rd. Price is 8vo.. convenient for the bag and library. T may still be had. On the 1st of each month. CROCKFORD, 10, Wellington-street, Sun" " This day is published, în royal 12mma., práv a

A BOOK of COSTS in the C

LAW and DIVORCE COURTS, with the Principle of the Allowances, and an Ansty upon Costs, from the time of passing the fr Procedure Act, &c. By E. W. LE RICHE

V. and R. STEVENS and SONS, Law Prin 26. Bell-yard, Lincoln's-in

Lately published, price &

[blocks in formation]

a concise and easy system, which hale nearly fifty years in the offices of some of the firms in London. By WILLIAM MACKENZI

"We commend this system of book-keeping. Ther stand, has been prepared by one who has had many me as well in Scotland as in England, bearing on the treats. The prefatory remarks should certainly be ma citor and articled clerk."-Law Magazine and Law R London: JOHN CROCKFORD, 10, Wellington

SMITH'S LAW OF CONTRACTS This day is published, Third Edition, in sp

THE LAW of CONTRACTS

late JOHN WILLIAM SMITH,
Leading Cases," "A Treatise on Mercant
Third edition. By J. G. MALCOLM, Esq., Bara
In 8vo., price 16s. cloth.
V. and R. STEVENS and SONS, H. SWEET and 7.
Law Publishers, London.

This day is published, Seventh Edition, h
10s. 6d, cloth,

SMITH'S ACTION at Li

Elementary View of the Proceeding at Law. By JOHN WILLIAM SMITH, I "Leading Cases," " A. Compendium of Mete &c. Seventh Edition. adapted to the presett “. SAMUEL PRENTICE, Esq., Barrister-a"Chitty's Archbold's Practice." In 12mo, jezi V. and R. STEVENS and SONS, H. SWEET and Law Publishers, London Just published, 1 vol. price DR. FORBES WINSLOW'S NEW WORK OF AND MENTAL DISORDERS N OBSCURE DISEASES of t

[ocr errors]

toms, Pathology, Diagnosis, Treatment, an By FORBES WINSLOW, M.D., D.C.L, Ü

"This work will be carefully studied and received ir " as the master effort of a great philosopher, whose war vast researches, large observation and close reassati " to diagnostic and practical curative purposes, are fre mankind and to the glory of medicine, inscribed is upon every page.”—Dublin Quarterly Medical Journs London: John CHURCHILL, New Burling

BOOKS.

THE
HE LAW of COSTS, with all the Decided Cases to this time, and TABLES of COSTS in various Proceedings at 2
Law and in other Cases. By A. MARSHALL, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, one of the Authors of "Paterson, Macuamara and Marshall's New Pati
Common Law." In one thick volume, price 21s. boards; 24s. half-bound. The following are the

CAP. I. The Nature of a Party's Right to Costs.

II. Plaintiff's Right to Costs in Tort when Damages are under 40s.

III. Plaintiff's Right to Costs in Contract where less
than 40s, are recovered.

IV. Effect of the County Courts Act on Plaintiff's
Right to Costs.

V. Defendant's Right to Costs.

VI. Costs of Interlocutory Proceedings.

VII. Costs of Demurrers.

VIII. Costs in Judgments by Default and other cases.
IX. Costs where Defendant pays Money into Court.
X. Costs of the Day.

XI. Costs of several issues.

XIL Costs in New Trials, Venire de Novo, Nonsuit, &c., &c.

CONTENTS:

CAP. XIII. Costs on Error and Appeal.

XIV. General Costs in the Cause.
XV. Bills of Costs and Delivery.
XVI. Reference to Taxation.
XVII. Notice of Taxation and Application to Tax.
XVIII. Functions of the Master in Taxing.

XIX. The Different Scales of Allowances on Taxation.
XX. Taxation on the Higher or Lower Scale.
XXI. Where Statute gives Double or Treble Costs.
XXII. Costs of Witnesses and Documentary Evidence.
XXIII. Allowance for Briefs and Counsel's Fees.
XXIV. Costs of Special Jury and View.

XXV. Allowance of Miscellaneous Costs.
XXVI. Set-off of Costs on Taxation.
XXVII. Taxation as between Attorney and Client.
XXVIII. Review of Taxation.

NEW LAWS OF THE SESSION,
THE REFRESHMENT and WINE

THE NEW LAW of BANKRUPTCY

and INSOLVENCY, with the Practice and Forms, will be prepared by A. A. DORIA, Esq., Barrister-at-law, Reporter of the Bankruptcy Courts for the LAW TIMES Reports.

In the press,

LICENCES ACT, with all the Alterations thereby made in the LAW of ALEHOUSES and BEERHOUSES. Edited by T. W. SAUNDERS, Esq., Recorder of Dartmouth.

[blocks in formation]

NEW EDITIONS OF PRACTICAL BOOKS.

[blocks in formation]

In the press,

HE NEW EDITION of GRAY'S
COUNTRY ATTORNEYS' PRACTICE, adapted to the
existing state of the Law.
Barrister-at-Law.

[blocks in formation]

THE
By WM. PATERSON, Esq.,

HE SECOND EDITIOS SAUNDERS'S NEW PRACTICE of MAGS COURTS. By T. W. SAUNDERS, Esq., Recre

mouth. Price 12s. cloth.

N.B. The above will be sent by post, paid, immediately on publication, to Solicitors sending orders for all, or either, to the Office as soon as possi

LAW TIMES OFFICE, 10, WELLINGTON-STREET, STRAND, W.C

To Readers and Correspondents.

If he has taken the business and office of the de-
d clerk, he might send a circular to all the clients in
ooks, announcing his accession to the business.
--We believe the office named to be perfectly safe.
H.-Yes; by the Literary Institutions Rating Act.
e names of the solicitors and attorneys will be given

they can be procured; but this is not always practi-
The name of the London agent often stands alone
the brief, that of the country solicitor not appearing.

sometimes difficult for the reporter, in the midst of ee benches from him, and some counsel object to give ames of their solicitors. Hence it is impossible to add

ork, to speak to the counsel in the cause, who sit two

to conduct also its advocacy in court than a
stranger, having no other information than that
which is afforded by a brief, however copiously
drawn. It is also unquestionable that the costs
of a case conducted by the solicitor alone, without
feeing a second lawyer, would be considerably
less than if counsel were employed, assuming, of
course, that the solicitor does not charge the
double fee.

But, granting this, there is the difficulty out of which we cannot clearly see the way. It is that which arose in the debate in the assembly at Melbourne, an abstract of which was given to our readers a fortnight ago. If the solicitors are permitted to practise as barristers, barristers must be permitted to act as solicitors; for the solicitors do not, of course, ask that they should be ddress of the writer, not necessarily for publication, permitted to have the monopoly of their own practice, with freedom to take also the practice of the bar. The doubt we feel is, whether, upon the

to every case; but the reporters will do so whenever can. It must be remembered that the system of ly reports does not permit of those inquiries out of which the delayed reports are enabled to make. munications must be authenticated with the name

3 a guarantee for good faith.
nymous communications are invariably rejected.

Y OF SALES BY AUCTION DURING balance of account, an advantage would be thus

THE NEXT WEEK. Advertised in the Law Times.

TUESDAY, JUNE 5.

ntial residence, at Feering, near Kelvedon, Essex, by s. Beadel, at the Mart. Advertised May 26.

use and buildings, and 18 acres, at Roydon, Essex; land-tax of 81. 8s., at Matching, by Messrs. Beadel,

obtained by the solicitors, or if, upon the con-
trary, they would not be losers by the bargain.
That was the argument in Australia, where the
movement was promoted by the bar, and opposed
by the solicitors on the express ground that the
bar would take from them, by practising without
them and doing their work, more than they
would gain by being permitted to do the work of
barristers.

to be brought before the House; whereas the fact is that Mr. James mentioned to me, in Westminsterhall yesterday morning, that he had heard of the existence of a difference of opinion among the commissioners as to the refusal of certificates, and that House. He at the same time asked me if the report he believed the fact was likely to be mentioned in the was true, and if I objected to my opinion being known. I told him that I and my brother commissioners had differed as to withholding one certificate; that I had mentioned the fact to the Chief Commissioner for Gloucester (Mr. Vaughan) and to others; and that I had no objection to its being stated publicly. Mr. James is mistaken in stating that the difference proceeded upon any other than the one ground-viz., whether the party had or had not made a full disclosure.

As regards the observations of the AttorneyGeneral, I am not aware that I have in any way unduly impeached the conclusion of my colleagues; and I think, had the learned Attorney-General borne in mind the nature of the commissioners' duty in withholding certificates, he would not have expressed the opinion upon me which he did. Each witness may ask for a certificate immediately that his examination is concluded (and this in practice is somediffer as to the propriety of granting the certificate, I times done). If, then, the commissioners should believe that it would be their duty to let the applicant know whether they were unanimous or otherwise in the refusal, and I cannot think that a commissioner who differed from his fellows, and publicly stated that he did so, would thereby be improperly impugnAs respects the Profession and the public, iting the judgment of the majority. It cannot matter is purely a question of cost. The solicitor acting alone could do the work much more cheaply than if counsel were also to be paid; but would that result follow? Would he not, in fact, charge for his services both as advocate and as solicitor? and, if so, no pecuniary advantage would accrue to the client. Professionally, it is a question on rary, by Mr. Hodgson, at his rooms, Chancery-lane. which only guesses can be hazarded, whether the tised this day.

Mart. Advertised May 26.

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 6.

e freehold farm of 201 acres, at Mayfield, Sussex, by Iarsh, at the Mart. Advertised this day.

d inn, bonded warehouse, waterside premises, &c., at

n Harbour, Plymouth, by Skardon and Sons, at the Crowns Inn, Plymouth. Advertised this day. THURSDAY, JUNE 7.

odseat estate of 750 acres, at Rocester, Staffordshire, in the Equity and Law Life Assurance Society, by

essrs. Kemp, at the Mart. Advertised this day.

Marsh, at the Mart. Advertised this day.
FRIDAY, JUNE 8.

[blocks in formation]

umbers of the New Series of the Reports are
on sale, to complete sets.
EPORTS will be uniformly and strongly bound at
ffice for 4s. The volumes of the LAW TIMES
18. 6d.
tfolio to contain thirty numbers of the Law
3 Reports may be had, price 3s. 6d. It will
rwarded by post (paid) on transmission of 3s. 10d.
stage-stamps-viz., 3s. 6d. for the portfolio, and
or the postage. It is made so that it will close as
sa book, whatever the quantity of leaves within
d thus it will serve all the purposes of a bound
and be a substitute for a weekly cover.

ne,

THE "LAW TIMES" REPORTS.
Reports are published also in Monthly Parts,
he use of the Courts, the Colonies, &c. Price 4s.
1. was issued on Dec. 1. The Part for
1 is now ready.

ases relating to Magistrates, Municipal and
sh Law are collected and issued separately for
se of Magistrates' Courts, edited, with Notes, &c.,
dward W. Cox, Esq., Editor of "Cox's Criminal
Cases." A part will be published at the close of
term. Part 1., price 2s. 6d., and Part 11., price

id., are now ready.

ove will be sent to the subscribers by post (paid).
s desirous of being supplied with the above series
requested to send their names to the office.

THE

two and the Lawyers.

SOLICITORS IN BANKRUPTCY.
new Bankruptcy Bill contains a provision
places the Courts of Bankruptcy in the same
on as the Superior Court with respect to
'rofession. The barrister only is to be heard
advocate. The solicitor is to practise only
ch. The Bar are not to be permitted to
le the province of the solicitors, nor the
tors that of the Bar.

will be seen, by some petitions which appear
other page, that the Yorkshire Law Society
others representing the opinions of the
itors generally, object to this provision, in
nterest not less of their clients than of them-

8.

e question is not so easy of solution as it ars at the first sight. There can be no doubt the solicitor having the conduct of the kruptcy, as such, would be more competent OL. XXXV.-No. 896.

loss to the solicitors from counsel acting without
them would not be greater than their gain by
acting without counsel.

Perhaps, upon the whole, it would be the safest
course to take the middle path, and to permit the
solicitor in bankruptcy to conduct the case if he
pleases. It will then be a question entirely between
himself and his client, and if the client prefers his
advocacy, he should have it. But if the solicitor
acting in the case is not willing to be its
advocate in court, but prefers to commit its ad-
vocacy to another, he might fairly be required to
employ counsel. Such an arrangement would be
just to all parties concerned. It would enable
the solicitor, desirous of sparing his client's purse,
with the approval of the client, to carry the case
through the court for him without the cost of an
advocate's fees. If, on the other hand, the soli-
citor is unable or unwilling to conduct the case in
person, he may then instruct counsel to act for
him.

Such an arrangement would be very preferable to a competition between barristers and solicitors for the whole work now divided between them, which must be the certain consequence of permitting a mutual invasion. Some of our readers imagine that such a contest would end in securing the whole business, both of advocacy and solicitorship, to the solicitors; but of this we feel doubtful whether many clients might not prefer by no means assured. We think it very the counsel's fee to the attorney's bill. At all events, it would be as well to ascertain this before any step is taken, the consequences of which, however disastrous to either or both, would be irretrievable.

A JUDGE'S LIPS.

ARE the lips of a judge closed to the divisions of
the Bench?

That is the question raised by an incident in
the proposed prosecutions for bribery at Wake-
field.

Mr. Serjt. PIGOTT differed from the majority of his colleagues as to the propriety of refusing a certificate of protection from prosecution to Mr. LEATHAM. This fact the learned serjeant imparted to Mr. E. JAMES, authorising him so to state in the House of Commons.

For so doing the Serjeant was severely rebuked by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL.

In self-defence he has written a letter to the Times, vindicating the right and duty of a judge to state his views, although differing from his colleagues.

Thus does Mr. Serjt. PIGOTT express himself: Mr. E. James's statement, that he had my authority for mentioning to the House the fact of a difference of opinion among the commissioners, may be read as if I were a volunteer in causing the subject

[ocr errors]

upon the question of publicity that the certificates are all considered and granted, or refused, at the end of the whole inquiry. Judicial acts ought not to require secrecy, and our law and equity reports teem with judgments in which one half the court, and indeed of the entire bench, differ from the other.

I beg to apologise for troubling you upon a matter personal to myself, and only feel excused in doing so as it concerns my discharge of a public duty. I am, Sir, your obedient and faithful servant, Temple, May 26. GILLERY PIGOTT.

It is clearly right.

He was sitting as a judge, performing a judicial act. It is the practice of judges, when they differ, not only to make known the fact of a difference, but to state the reasons for dissent from the conclusion of the majority. That course was not adopted in this instance, only because it was not then deemed a matter of sufficient moment to call for a formal judgment; but had it been asked for, there can be no doubt that the dissentient would have been declared, and he would have advanced the reasons for his difference.

Not only is Mr. Serjt. PIGOTT right in his claim to publish the fact of the division among his fellow-judges, but he would have deserved blame had he refused to do so. Whensoever more judges than one sit together, it is the duty of dissentients to declare publicly their dissent from the majority whose judgment decides the question. They are placed together purposely that different heads may take different views of the same case; if they were always to agree they would be a superfluity, and the public who appoint them have a right to know their individual as well as their collective opinions.

A dissentient judge in every court, from the the reasons for his dissent. If good, they will highest to the lowest, should be required to state satisfy others that he is right. If bad, they will satisfy himself that he is wrong.

PROSECUTIONS FOR BRIBERY. THE House complained that nothing came of the costly commissions that so mercilessly ferreted out the corruptions of Wakefield and Gloucester. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL acted upon the hint, and promised a prosecution. With creditable impartiality he selected the two candidates and three of their most active participators, and he proposes to commit the conduct of the cases to four counsel of each party; that is to say, the Conservatives are to be prosecuted by Whig barristers, and the Radicals by Conservative barristers. Nothing could be more fair, if it is right to prosecute at all. But the propriety of such a prosecution has been questioned both within and without the House. In the first place, it is urged as an act almost of cruelty to single out eight from among many equally guilty and equally punishable. A more formidable objection is the fact that these defendants made the disclosures in reliance upon the provision of the statute that exempts from prosecution all who shall obtain from the commissioners a certificate that they had made a full disclosure. It appears now that with respect to one of them, Mr. LEATHAM, the commissioners were divided in opinion whether

« PreviousContinue »