said: "The question in this case involved a point of construction. He was of opinion that the trustee, in the first place, could deduct from the amount in his hands the actual disbursements for realisation, and that the remainder, which formed the net proceeds of the estate, referred to in the 31st rule, should be distributed in the following manner-first, costs of the re. ceiver, who had taken possession of and protected the property; and, secondly, the costs of the solicitor under the liquidation petition." In that case a bankruptcy supervened, but it did not matter. There was another case on all-fours with the present proceedings in 33 L. T. Rep. N. S. 39. There the head-note stated that in administering the estate of a liquidating debtor the trustee should, after deducting his own actual disbursements for realisation, apply the amount actually in his hands-first, in payment of the receiver's charges under the petition, and then of the solicitor's costs under the liquidation. Robson, in his last edition, said that it appeared, according to Ex parte Page, that the petitioning creditor's costs were to be paid, after deducting from the amount of money in hand all actual disbursements of the trustee in realisation and the receiver's charges, in priority to the ordinary costs of the trustee and his solicitor. Now, in this case, the trustee had really tried to deduct his ordinary costs and disbursements before he passed the bill of Messrs. Bantoft, and he (Mr. Laverack) submitted that it was not competent for him to do so. The costs of realisation were really paid by Messrs. Bantoft, and, so far as the trustee was concerned, the amount was only as regarded the actual disbursements for realisa tion, because there had been no realisation since. There had been an investigation in certain matters, but he believed they had proved abor. tive. Mr. Laverack went on to say that there was a balance of £28 or £29 in the hands of the trustee, and he ought to make the deduction stated. The REGISTRAR.-For expenses incurred by him in realisation, or his own costs? Laverack.-His actual costs in protecting the estate. The REGISTRAR.-And has probably a lien upon it? Laverack said that, as the word "lien" bore upon the words "first net proceeds," he might say that it appeared to him that the Legislature, in making the costs of the solicitor for the debtor a charge upon the first net proceeds of the estate, had in mind the fact that they deprived the solicitor of his ordinary lien. Torry, who represented Mr. Ginn, opposed the motion, and said the point in dispute no doubt was as to the construction which his friend wished to put upon the net realisation in a great measure, but not altogether, because the incentive to the costs that the trustees had already been put to emanated to a large extent from Mr. Bantoft. It was an admitted fact that the realisation was only £38 98. 9d., and he thought that he might venture to say that his friend would not dispute that the disbursements at the present amounted to to £28 7s. 5d. Laverack said he did not know anything about them. Torry, continuing, said that there were other sums paid for court fees, and he submitted that in strict justice the various payments the trustees had made ought to be deducted from the fund they had in hand. In giving judgment, the REGISTRAR said that Mr. Torry had done all he could in support of the motion, but the construction for which he contended could not be justified. On two principles the costs of the liquidation proceedings were payable in the first instance, namely that they were first incurred in order of time, and secondly, they were the foundation of whatever afterwards was possible in the liquidation or in bankruptcy, of which the creditors obtained the benefit-they were, so to speak, the causa causans of the whole matter. Moreover, the words of the rule were clear. They were not, as Mr. Torry had read them, that the costs were to be paid first "out of the net proceeds," but that they were to be paid "out of the first net proceeds." This being so, the net fund first available was liable to the Upon any other construction the word "first," as it appeared in the rule, would be superfluous, which he could not attribute to the judges who framed it. An order would therefore be made in the terms of the motion, but perhaps payment of costs would not be insisted on under the circumstances. Order accordingly. costs. Mowll for defendant. This was an action brought to recover a balance of account for beer supplied. Mowll took the preliminary objection that this was an action in respect of a contract entered into by plaintiff since the filing of his petition in 1875, who had not obtained his discharge, and whose liquidation was not closed; and therefore he could not bring the action, and relied on sub-sect. 3 of sect. 15, which says that the property divisible amongst a bankrupt's creditors shall comprise "all such property as may belong to or be vested in the bankrupt at the commencement of the bankruptcy, or may be acquired by or devolve on him during its continuance." Mercer said that the law was clearly laid down to the effect that a contract entered into by a debtor could not be enforced unless the trustee interfered, which he had not done in this case, and in support of his contention he cited Robson on Bankruptcy, Chitty on Contracts, and Davis's County Courts Practice. His HONOUR asked Mr. Mercer if he could refer him to any case decided since the Bankruptcy Act 1869, in support of the law as laid down by the writers of these works. Mercer said at present he was unable to do so, but drew attention to the fact that defendant had not pleaded this new defence, and had not been successful in obtaining an order for security of costs before the case was remitted, and asked his Honour to allow the case to proceed, and if plaintiff obtained judgment the trustees could then claim the benefit of it, and submitted that this would not prejudice anyone. His HONOUR said he should not allow the case to proceed without the names of the trustees being joined, and adjourned the case to the Deal Court so that in the meantime they could be communicated with, when, if they consented, he would amend the record. COUNTY COURTS. BEDFORD COUNTY COURT. Thursday, Oct. 10. (Before Mr. HOMERSHAM Cox, Judge.) Railway company-Warehouse charges-Contract -Right of company to charge. LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN AND MIDLAND RAILWAY COMPANIES v. RANSOM. THE first was a claim for 8s. 4d. charge for warehousing various consignments of grain by the London and North-Western Railway Company at Bedford for the defendant Mr. Edwin Ransom, miller, Kempston. The company were represented by a solicitor; the defendant conducted his own case. It was stated that there was no question between the parties as to the rate of charge or the time for which the charge was made. The matter in dispute was whether the accommodation afforded by the company was really warehousing the goods. The plaintiffs' solicitor in opening the case stated that the practice was on the arrival of wheat to give the consignee notice that it was at the station, and the form of advice note was put in stating that the goods were there subject to the usual charges for warehousing, and not in the custody of the company as common carriers. The custom was to allow the grain to remain five days without charge; after the expiration of that time a charge of halfpenny per sack per week was made. John Wootton, chief clerk at the goods station, gave evidence as to the custom to give notice of arrival of grain and its remaining for five days without charge, after which a charge was made. He produced printed notice to that effect issued in July 1872, and stated that he had served copies on millers in the Corn Exchange. The defendant objected to the charge on the ground that the company, although making this charge, had been refused payment and had not enforced it. He did not recollect having received a copy of the notice produced. His contention was that the charge was for warehousing, whereas there was no warehouse, and the grain was put where it was liable to be injured, and where, in fact, it had been injured. The place where it was put was a platform composed of old sleepers, without a roof, and open to the weather. Tarpaulin sheets were used, but they did not always serve the purpose of a covering To charge for rent of warehouse when the goods had been injured by the want of it was only adding insult to injury. He had signified his willingness to pay if the grain were warehoused, but the company had neglected to provide a building. (Before GEORGE RUSSELL, Esq., Judge.) In answer to a question from his Honour as to whether the tarpaulin was DENNE V. SADDLETON (remitted from the Common | defendant stated that his grain had been rea protection, the Pleas Division of the High Court of Justice.) peatedly wetted; either the tarpaulin was bad, or Plaintiff bankrupt No order of discharge-else it was not put over. Grain had been at the Joinder of trustees-Pleading. SANDWICH COUNTY COURT. Monday, Oct. 21. C. J. Mercer appeared for the plaintiff. station and he was not aware of it. The plaintiff's solicitor quoted the case of Mitchell and others v. Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway (L. Rep. vol. 10, Q. B. 1875), which was an action brought to recover damages for flax which had been injured. In that case it was admitted that reasonable care had not been taken; the question was as to whether the company were bound to take such care, and Chief Justice Blackburn ruled that they were, but could have charged warehouse rent for doing so. The defendant submitted that the circumstances of the cases might have been different; the dispute here was as to whether the place was a warehouse or not. Mr. G. Overend, town agent of the London and North-Western Company, described the place for which the claim was made. A platform was erected about three feet from the ground, above this was a pole along the centre, and from it tarpaulin sheets were spread over the corn every time any was stored underneath. The sheets were selected for the purpose, and carefully examined. Complaints had been made previous to the 1st Feb. last, but since then the corn has been better protected, and the sheets would stand any reasonable stress of weather. They did not commence to charge until the improvement had been made. The defendant pointed out that the company had sent in bills which he had refused to pay, and they had acquiesced in the refusal. His HONOUR said he would consider the case during the interval for luncheon, and give his judgment afterwards. After luncheon the case of The Midland Railway Company was taken. This was a similar case to the last. The company were represented by a solicitor. In opening the case the solicitor stated that neither the rate nor time was contested. He put in the advice note which stated that the goods "remain here to your order, and are now held by the company as warehousemen." There was no actual warehouse, but the committee made provision in another way. He referred to the same case as quoted by the solicitor for the London and NorthWestern Company, and contended that as the company could not get rid of the liability for injury they were entitled to make this charge. James Newton, grain foreman at the Midland Station, Bedford, stated that a floor was made of old sleepers with sheets on that, and straw on that again. The grain was then placed on these and covered with sheets which were made to overlap the bottom sheets which were turned up. In very bad weather two sheets were placed on the top. The best sheets were always selected for this purpose. James Williams, inspector, Derby, stated that he had seen the defendant several times on the subject. At the commencement of the year there were a great many outstanding accounts for warehousing, but the defendant was regularly applied to for payment. He declined on the ground that the grain was not warehoused. In consultation with the London and North Western Company it was agreed to waive the old accounts and start afresh with this year. Since then the account in dispute had occurred, which the de fendant declined to pay for the same reason as he had previously given. His HONOUR.- Did you communicate that agreement to the defendant? Witness.-We did not intimate that we had sunk the old items. The agreement with the London and North-Western Company was that we should sink the old items and enforce the payment in future. When I saw him I told him we should. enforce payment of the old charges. His HONOUR.-Did you let him have his goods notwithstanding he declined to pay? The witness replied that the defendant had a ledger account which was made up monthly. He did not give defendant to understand that there would be a fresh agreement. In the latter part of last year he told defendant that the charges would be enforced, and he replied that he was prepared to defend any action. In answer to the defendant the witness stated that the charge was the usual one, and the same as where the grain was put in a warehouse. Complaints had been received at Sharnbrook and elsewhere of putting grain on sleepers laid on the ground. The solicitor to the Midland Company explained that this was a perfectly friendly action. The defendant stated that he had always refused this charge of the Midland Company because they refused to give him the warehouse building which they gave in other places. He called attention to the extraordinary definition of a "warehouse given by the witness in this case, namely, old sleepers and tarpaulin. He was not charged for rent, but for warehouse accommodation, which he had never had afforded him. His HONOUR, in giving judgment, said :-I have listened to these cases very carefully. The two companies sue for the use of a warehouse, and there is no warehouse in existence. On that ground alone, if that were all. I am clearly of To charge opinion that they could not succeed. a man for a warehouse when there is no warehouse is simply preposterous; you might just as well charge a man for a dwelling house and put him in a tent. But, besides that, this is a matter of contract. I have got to see whether there has been any contract between these two parties that he should pay these charges. I have got his own positive oath that every time the charge was preferred he said, "I won't enter into such a contract." They say they made an agreement behind his back that they would make him pay, and one of them told him of it, but he said still, "I won't pay it." They let his goods go off the premises, and don't enforce their agreement. There is no contract; he says from first to last, "I won't pay." Their remedy was clearly this: "If you don't pay we will thrust your goods into the street." But they don't do that, but still keep them. Clearly, in both cases, judgment must be for the defendant. Both solicitors asked for cases to be granted to try the question in a superior court. His HONOUR.-It is terrible to make this gentle-a man fight two railway companies. The solicitors for the Midland Company and London and North-Western Company agreed to hold the defendant indemnified as to costs, and his Honour noted the agreement in the following terms: "Leave to both companies to appeal, both undertaking not to charge costs as against the defendant if they succeed." His HONOUR asked the plaintiff whether he had received any such sum, and the plaintiff produced his books, denying any such receipt. His HONOUR then asked to whom the money was paid. Jones replied that it was paid to Mrs. Parks, and he had two witnesses to prove it, His HONOUR asked why Mr. Jones had not subpoenaed Mrs. Parks. She was the best person to give evidence on the subject, and he should hear no other. The verdict would be for the plaintiff for the full amount, less the £2 6s. 3d., which was objected to. Jones thereupon retired from the case. His HONOUR asked what Mr. Jones had to complain of. Jones answered that his Honour had declined to hear his witnesses. His HONOUR.-Have you any witnesses ? Jones.-Certainly; I have two that will swear the money was paid. His HONOUR.-Call them then. Jones accordingly called a son of the defendant, who swore that he had paid £10 on account on the 7th Oct. 1875, and produced a cash book containing an entry to that effect. His HONOUR again expressed his anxiety to hear Mrs. Parks's evidence, and eventually the case was held over while she was sent for. On her arrival she swore that no £10 had been paid at all. Jones recalled the defendant's son, who again swore to the payment. His HONOUR said that the defendant's story seemed straightforward, and he would take his version of the transaction. The £10 would be deducted from the judgment. Judgment was then entered up for £6 58. 10d. MELTON MOWBRAY COUNTY COURT. (Before F. BARROW, Esq., Judge.) A judicial Regret. THE parties to this action are butchers, residing at Sewstern, and the claim was for two quarters of beef, of the value of £12 10s. 9d., supplied to defendant on the 9th July 1875. James, who defended, pleaded that the beef had never been received by his client. for the two quarters of beef. He (plaintiff) large an amount of capital for the directors to have in hand to enable them to relieve the large number of people who made applications. (Hear, hear.) He moved the adoption of the report. (Hear, hear.) Mr. R. A. Payne (Liverpool), in seconding the motion, said that in a canvass which he had recently made at Liverpool he had succeeded in getting twenty new members and a donation of ten guineas from a friend. He sug gested that other gentlemen should canvass in a similar manner. (Hear, hear.) After some discussion, and the Chairman having briefly replied, the motion was carried. Votes of thanks having been passed to the directors and auditors, the same gentlemen were re-elected for the ensuing year. Mr. Frederic Thomas Woolbert, of 12, Lincoln's-inn-fields, London, was appointed a director, and Mr. E. F. Burton, of 37, Lincoln's-innfields, London, ex-President of the Incorporated Law Society, was appointed a trustee, both in the Plaintiff.-Will your Honour allow costs? room of Mr. J. S. Torr. It was decided that a vote His HONOUR.-Yes; ten times over if I could in of condolence should be forwarded to the family of case like this: you must have full costs. Mr. Torr. A vote of thanks to the chairman concluded the proceedings of the meeting. In answer to an application for adjournment by Mr. James, his Honour stated that the only thing he would like would be to send defendant to Leicester gaol. He gave judgment for plaintiff for the amount claimed. LAW SOCIETIES. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE PRO- MR. H. W. BOYD MACKAY, of Exeter, read a necessary SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION. LEGAL NEWS. JUDICIAL CRITICISM ON THE ASSIZES. AT Manchester, Manisty, J. in charging the grand jury, having invited them to express their opinion upon the desirability or otherwise of increasing the number of the assizes in the year, at the conclusion of their labour on behalf of the grand jury, made the following presentment: "The grand jury have taken into consideration the question of holding three or tour assizes during the year; and looking at the progressive increase of the criminal and civil business, they are of opinion that unless many cases of comparatively minor importance are sent to the quarter sessions instead of the assizes, it will be desirable to have four assizes in such districts as this. They are also of opinion that a great number of the cases that come before them at these assizes might, with great public advantage, had the law allowed them, had been sent for trial at the quarter sessions. They beg also to call attention to the serious public inconvenience arising from the clashing of assizes with quarter sessions in this county, which has embarrassed the action of quarter sessions on several occasions, notably this week, when the criminal business of the sessions was not concluded at the time of the opening of the commission of the assizes, and the whole of the appeal cases, with one exception, were necessarily adjourned to the intermediate sessions to be held on the 21st Nov., at serious inconvenience and expense to the parties concerned." At Chester Lord Justice Thesiger spoke at some length on the frequency of the assizes. His Lordship said he was afraid that the attendance of the grand jury on the occasion of an additional assize must be a source of considerable inconvenience, but he felt that when they looked at the calendar with which they had to deal, the character of the offences contained in it, and that less than three months ago assizes had been held in the county, they would come to the conclusion that, whatever difference of opinion there might be as to the exact period at which assizes should be held, at all events that additional assize was not held without good cause and reason. After some further observations upon the advantage of holding four assizes in the year, or rather for each period of three months in the year, his Lordship said he, in common with those of his body, entertained doubts as to the wisdom of holding four assizes in the year; but, feeling that the institution was one which was likely to be permanent, he had endeavoured to see whether or not it was an institution that was to be commended and would be cheerfully adopted by the country. Although it might be said that the frequency of assizes led to additional expense, and although it might be suggested by some that they might take off from that respect and dignity which attached to the Commission of Assize of Her Majesty, it seemed to him that a wise discretion had been exercised in the final decision which appeared to have been come to, that there should be a quarterly assize. It seemed to him wise for this among other reasons. For many years it had been considered necessary that there should be a session of the peace held quarterly, and at those sessions it had been the habit to try cases of lesser importance. That seemed to him to bring the administration of justice in a county to a quasi-unity and a sort of completeness, and if there was a quarterly session for the trial of cases of lesser gravity, there should be a quarterly assize for the trial of cases of graver importance. If there was to be an autumn assize permanently, it was desirable that it should be in harmony with those who had to work out the change. If it was not to be permanent, it was essential that those in the position of gentlemen on the grand jury should discuss the matter among themselves and state their views upon it, so that possibly a change might be made that would be consonant with their own feelings. As to the possible loss of dignity by the frequency of the assizes, his Lordship said he did not attach much importance to that. Though he did not for one moment wish to see the dignity which surrounded the administration of justice at the assizes done away with or impaired, he thought that in these days of educational enlightenmeat the respect which was paid to the judges, both of superior and inferior tribunals, was not so much due to the accidental surroundings of pomp and dignity which attached to them, but rather to that innate love of law which was to be found in the English race, and to the consciousness that in all those tribunals the law would be independently and impartially administered. Lord Coleridge, at the Devon assize, protested strongly against the present assize arrangements. as they affected both jurymen and the judges. Referring to the unfavourable criticisms which had been passed on modern juries, he said it was owing in a large degree to the systematic evasion of the law by under-sheriffs, in the construction of the panel in favour of the rich and against the poor. In future, if any jury list did not contain a due proportion of both rich and poor, as required by the law of the land, he should treat it as a contempt of court. Later on his Lordship threatened to commit to prison the governor of the gaol for contempt in refusing to take into custody a bailed prisoner who had surrendered himself. COMMON LAW BUSINESS.-During the last legal year, from the 2nd Nov. 1877 to the 8th Aug. 1878, more than 56,000 actions were instituted in the third Common Law Divisions; but not one-tenth part of them came into court. It has appeared that about 2000 actions were entered for trial at the sittings and the assizes, between 4000 and 5000 altogether, and of these again only a portion are tried. During the last sittings in the metropolis, including London and Westminster, above 1000 causes (1032) were entered, and of these only 330 were disposed of, and about as many stayed or withdrawn, leaving nearly 500 to be tried or disposed of, which would stand over till the ensuing sitting. There are now, however, about 600 causes waiting for trial in the metropolis; that is, 100 more than were standing at the end of the last sitting; and the number is daily being added to. At the last sittings in the metropolis, out of above 1000 causes entered for trial only 330 were disposed of, and of these only about 190 were tried; about 420 were withdrawn, stayed, or made remanets by the parties. It may be mentioned that the business in the Common Law Divisions does not seem to be diminishing. In 1877, in the period between Jan. 1 and Sept. 30, there were about 16,000 actions commenced in the Exchequer Division, and this year during the same period nearly 500 more; while during the whole legal year, from Nov. 2, 1877, to Aug. 8, 1878, there were 21,650 causes .commenced in that Division. It is a curious fact that the number was greater in the Exchequer than in any other Division, for in the Queen's Bench the numbers were about 18,000, in the Common Pleas about 16.500, and in the Exchequer, as already stated, 21,650. The broad result, how. ever, is that about 56,000 actions were instituted last legal year in the Common Law Divisions, and that of these not one tenth part, probably not a twelfth part were ever brought into court. We regret to learn that Lord Gordon, one of the Lords of Appeal, has been ordered by his medical advisers to pass the early months of the winter in the South of France, and that his Lordship will, therefore, be unable to be present at the hearing of Appeals in the House of Lords at the ensuing sittings,commencing on the 5th November. THE NEW LAW COURTS.-An important section of the new law courts building is on the point of completion, and it is expected that the first step in the transfer of the various legal courts and offices to the vicinity of the Strand will shortly be taken. It is not intended to allow any finished portion of this vast maze of buildings to remain unoccupied until the whole is completed, but each section will be taken possession of as it is handed over by the contractors, who are now putting finishing touches to the huge block, the front of which looks down into Bell-yard, on the eastern side of what has usually been spoken of as the Carey-street site. There are now about 1000 hands employed on the works, and operations are proceeding rapidly, though it would be rash to affirm that the contract time, which, we believe, expires in about two years, will be adhered to, even when the stipulated allowance has been made for the strike and for frosty weather. MR. S. CHAPMAN, solicitor, and a member of the Corporation of Bridgwater, has given notice that at the meeting of the Council on November 9th, he will move a resolution relative to the fre quency with which the Recorder (Mr P. H. Edlin, Q.C., Judge of the Court of Sessions for Middlesex) performs his duty by deputy, and the irregu. larity with which the quarter sessions for the borough are held. MR. CHARLES PARKER BUTT, who was called to the bar of Lincoln's-inn in 1854, and became a Q.C., in 1868, has been adopted as a Liberal candidate for Southampton at the next election; and the Hon. T. C. Agar Robartes, who was admitted a member of the Middle Temple in 1870, will be the Liberal candidate for East Cornwall. THE salaries of the Clerks to the Magistrates througout Worcestershire were some time ago fixed at certain amounts, and the system having had a trial of six months, it has been ascertained that the fees received will more than cover the disbursements on salary account. For the half year there is a surplus of about £150; and for the past quarter the fees amounted to £977 168., as against £775 paid to the clerks in stated salaries. THE creditors of Mr. John Cutts, solicitor, Town Clerk of Chesterfield and Clerk to the Borough Magistrates, on Monday agreed to accept a composition of 108. in the pound, payable in seven annual instalments of £200 each. The statement showed liabilities £9000, as against assets £3600. The two appointments held by Mr. Cutts produce £479 per annum, out of which the salary of a clerk and other expenses have to he provided. CORRESPONDENCE OF THE PROFESSION. NOTE. This Department of the LAW TIMES being open to free discussion on all professional topics, the Editors do not hold themselves responsible for any opinions or statements contained in it. the mortgagee or the person claiming through him; and in such case no such action or suit shall be brought but within twelve years next after the time at which ments, if more than one, was given." As to what is a such acknowledgment or the last of such acknowledgsufficient acknowledgment, see Fursden v. Clogg, 10 M. & W. 572. And as to what is not, see Lucas v. Dennison, 13 Sim. 584; Richardson v. Young, 39 L. J. N. S. 475, Ch. ; L. Rep. 10 Eq. 275, which latter cases are stated and noted in a note on page 143, in Paterson's Practical Statutes for 1874. T. F. U. NOTA BENE.-Information intended for publication under the above heading should reach us not later than Thursday morning in each week, as publication is otherwise delayed. MR. JOHN WALTER WILSON, who was admitted at Midsummer 1867, has been appointed Town Clerk of Plymouth, in succesion to Mr. C. Cobley Whiteford, Solicitor, resigned. The salary of the office is £550 per annum, with permission to continue private practice. MR. INIGO GELL, solicitor, Lewes, has been reappointed Town Clerk of Seaford. Mr. Gell was admitted in 1845. MR. EDGAR GOBLE, of Fareham, solicitor, and Coroner for Hants, has been appointed Solicitor to the school board for the Parishes of Wymering and Widley in Hampshire. MR. J. S. D. THOMPSON, has been appointed Attorney-General of Nova Scotia, the official valary of which is £320 per annum. MR. ARTHUR SHELLEY, of Littlehampton, has been appointed Clerk to the East Preston Board of guardians, in succession to the late Mr. Robert French, solicitor. The salary of the office is £100 per annum, with such amounts as may be voted for services as Clerk to the Rural Sanitary Authority, and Assessment and School Attendance Committees. Mr. Shelley was a very efficient assistant of the late Clerk, and has had his articles given him by the firm of French and Hardwicke. MR. JOHN PARKER, who was admitted in 1856, has been elected Clerk to the Board of Governors of the Wycombe Charities, as re-constituted under the new official scheme. GIFT ABSOLUTELY TO WIFE FOR BENEFIT OF FAMILY. I wish to draw attention to the case of Hutchinson v. Tenant (39 L. T. Rep. N. S. 86), by which it was decided that where a testator gave all his real and personal estate to his wife 66 abso. lutely, with full power for her to dispose of the same as she may think fit for the benefit of my family, having full confidence that she will do so," she took absolutely. This case should be read simultaneously with the two cases referred to by Mr. Haynes, in his Outlines of Equity, THE p. 106, in one of which a trust was admitted, and in the other not. T. F. U. (Q. 59.) EXAMINATION QUESTIONS.-"A. L. F." will find the following answer to his question in Purkis's Student's Guide to Chitty, Williams and Haynes: "Fist, those conveyances which operate by the common law are these: feoffment, grant, gift, lease, exchange, partition, release, confirmation, surrender, assignment, underlease, defeasance. Besides these modes of conveyance, there are some which operate partly by virtue of the Statute of Uses and partly by virtue of the common law; such are these: feoffment to uses, grant to uses, statutory release. Secondly, those conveyances which take effect by force of the Statute of Uses are the following: appointment under a power, bargain and sale, and a covenant to stand seised." that a conveyance operating at common law is when a person has an estate at law, and does not hold it subject to any trust; he has of course the same estate in equity, but without resorting to its aid: (vide Williams on Real Property, 9th edit., p. 170.) T. F. U. I should say (Q. 75.) MORTGAGE-REAL PROPERTY ACT 1874. - If "S. B." will refer to the 7th section of 37 & 68 Vict. c. 57 (Real Property Limitation Act 1874), he will see that it expressly enacts that, "When a mortgagee shall have obtained the possession or receipt of the profits of any land, or the receipt of any rent comprised in his through him shall not bring any action or suit to remortgage, the mortgagor or any person claiming deem the mortgage but within twelve years next after the time at which the mortgagee obtained such possession or receipt, or unless in the meantime an acknowledgment in writing of the title of the mortgagor, or of his right to redemption, shall have been given to the mortgagor, or some person claiming his estate, or to the agent of such mortgagor or person, signed by Thursday Saturday, Nov. 2 V.C Malins. Pemberton 4 5 Ward Pemberton 7 Ward 8 Pemberton 9 Ward Master of the Rolls. Leach Milne Mr. Justice Fry. King 4 Clowes Tuesday 5 Кое Holdship Wednesday 6 Clowes Teesdale Thursday 7 Saturday 14 Bankruptcy appeals and other 15 Appeals 16 Ditto 18 Ditto 19 Ditto 20 Appeal motions ex parte, appeals 21 Bankruptcy appeals and other Friday.......................... 22 Appeals Thursday Saturday. Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday. 23 Ditto 25 Ditto 26 Ditto Such days, if any, as the Master of the Rolls shall be Tuesday.........Dec. 3 General paper Čauses and actions in which witnesses are to be Unopposed petitions must be presented and copies Any cause intended to be heard as a short cause must 28 Bankruptcy appeals and other 29 Appeals Saturday............... 30 Ditto Ditto 3 Ditto Tuesday Thursday Friday Friday Saturday.. Appeal motions ex parte, appeals 5 Bankruptcy appeals and other 13 Appeals 6 Appeals Thursday 7 Ditto general paper Monday 9 Ditto Saturday 9 Adjourned summonses and Tuesday 10 Ditto general paper Wednesday Monday 11 General paper Tuesday Wednesday 13 Ditto appeals Bankruptcy appeals and other Thursday Monday Friday. Tuesday appeals general paper Wednesday Adjourned summonses Saturday.. 14 Ditto Friday Monday Saturday Tuesday 17 Ditto Tuesday 19 Ditto Wednesday 20 Ditto Monday from orders made on interlo- Thursday Tuesday. Friday. 22 Short causes, petitions, and Wednesday Thursday 14 Saturday 23 Adjourned summonses and Friday appeals Saturday 20 Appeals 21 Ditto Tuesday 26 Ditto Monday Wednesday Friday... 29 Short causes, petitions, and Thursday general paper Friday Adjourned summonses general paper Monday ......Dec. 2 General paper Monday 3 Ditto Tuesday. Wednesday Thursday Thursday Friday Friday general paper Saturday Adjourned summonses and Monday... Wednesday... Thursday............ 19 Bankruptcy appeals and other Lunacy petitions will be taken every Saturday Wednesday during the sittings. Saturday Saturday 5 Ditto 6 Ditto 7 Ditto 8 Motions, adjourned summonses, 9 Petitions, short causes, ad- general paper 11 General paper 15 Motions, adjourned summonses, 16 Petitions, short causes, ad journed summonses, general paper 18 General paper Tuesday Saturday Nov. 2 Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Monday Tuesday. 12 Ditto Wednesday 13 Ditto Thursday 14 Ditto Friday 19 Ditto Wednesday 20 Ditto Thursday 21 Ditto Friday Saturday and 22 Motions, adjourned summonses, 23 Petitions, short clauses, ad- general paper 25 General paper Monday Tuesday.. 26 Ditto Wednesday 27 Ditto Thursday 28 Ditto Friday Saturday and 5 Motions and general paper 6 Short causes, petitions, and general paper 9 General paper 10 Ditto 12 Motions and general paper 13 Short causes, petitions, and Any cause intended to be heard as a short cause must be so marked in the cause book at least one clear day before the same can be put in the paper to be so heard, and the necessary papers be left in court with the judge's officer the day before the cause is to be put in the paper. (Before V.C. BACON.) At Lincoln's-inn. Saturday ......Nov. 2 Motions Monday Tuesday. Wednesday Thursday Friday 4 In bankruptcy 5 General paper 6 Ditto 7 Motions, adjourned summonses, and general paper 8 General paper 9 Petitions, short causes, and general paper 11 In bankruptcy 19 Motions and general paper 20 Petitions and general paper Any cause intended to be heard as a short cause must be so marked in the cause book at least one clear day before the same can be put in the paper to be so heard, and the necessary papers be left in court with the judge's officer the day before the cause is to be put in the paper. Further considerations will be taken as part of the general paper in priority to original causes which have not already appeared in the paper. (Before Mr. Justice FRY.) At Lincoln's-inn. .Nov. 11 General paper journed Monday ....Dec. 2 General paper Tuesday. 3 Ditto Monday Wednesday 4 Ditto Thursday 5 Ditto Friday 6 Motions, adjourned summonses, and general paper Monday 12 General paper Wednesday 13 Ditto Wednesday 13 Ditto Thursday.. 14 Ditto Thursday Saturday 7 Petitions, short journed causes, adsummonses, and and general paper Friday. 15 General paper general paper Saturday 14 Motions, adjourned summonses, 16 Petitions, short causes, and Tuesday Friday 15 Ditto Saturday 16 Ditto Monday 18 Ditto 19 Ditto Monday 9 General paper general paper Wednesday. 20 Ditto Tuesday 10 Ditto Monday 18 In bankruptcy Tuesday 19 General paper Thursday Wednesday 20 Ditto Saturday 23 Ditto 13 Motions, adjourned summonses, short causes, ad- Friday Thursday 21 Motions, adjourned summonses, and general paper 22 General paper Wednesday 27 Ditto journed summonses, and Saturday 23 Petitions, short causes, and Thursday.. 28 Ditto general paper general paper Friday 29 Ditto Monday 16 General paper Monday 25 In bankruptcy Saturday 30 Ditto Tuesday. 17 Ditto Tuesday. 26 General paper Wednesday 18 Ditto Wednesday 27 Ditto Thursday 19 Ditto Thursday 28 Motions, adjourned summonses, Wednesday 4 Ditto Friday 20 Motions, adjourned summonses, and general paper Thursday 5 Ditto and general paper Friday. 29 General paper Friday 6 Ditto Petitions, short causes, journed summonses, adand Saturday 30 Petitions, short causes, and Saturday 7 Ditto general paper Monday 9 Ditto general paper Monday..... In bankruptcy Tuesday 10 Ditto Re Agar-Ellis, inants Pocock v. The Grand Junc- Re The Neath and Brecon Re Skinner (deceased) - Curteis v. Wormald Attorney-General v. Great Eastern Railway Co. 1878. Re The Gold Co. (Limited) The Nant y Glo and Blaina Re Davidson (deceased) Re Leach (deceased) Re The London and Cale donian, &c., Insurance Gilbert v. Smith The Sheffield Waggon Company (Limited) v. Stratton and others The Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England v. Rowe Borrowman, Phillips, and Co. v. Free and Hollis Re an Arbitration between Bidder and others and the Nutter (widow) v. The Accrington Board of Health Lady Willoughby de Eresby v. Evans Bridgman and another (executors) v. Glover Shearer v. Burnell The Hydraulic Engineering Company (Limited) v. M'Haffie, Goslett, and Co. Lawson v. The Positive Government Security Life As surance Company (Limited) Kneale v. Christian Jameson and Co. v. The Brick and Stone Co. (Limited) Elmslie and others v. Corrie Re"Kathleen Mavourneen and "Dermot Astore" Johnson v. Wigan Waggon Company Martin v. Maconochie (clerk) Martin v. Maconochie (clerk) Appeals from the Common Pleas Division. For Hearing.-Remanets. 1876. Mayor, &c., of London v. London Joint Stock Bank Grant and another. The Banque Franco Egyptienne and another Higgs v. The Wimbledon Local Board Plummer v. Price Swift v. Nunn Goddard v. Robson and another For Hearing.-New Appeals. The Inman Steam Ship Company (Limited) v. The Owners of the Lauretta Symington and others v. The Owners of the Harry S. Edwards and Freight Perkins and Homer v. The Owners of the Condor and North German Lloyds, Owners of the Mowe and others Lowden, Edgar, and Co. and others v. Leyland and others The Owners of the Elizabeth Ann and others v. The Owners of the Cingalese and Freight Leyland and others v. Lowden, Edgar, and others The Owners of the Maggie L. Carvill v. The Owners of the Emma The Owners of the Barque Calypso v. The Owners of the Steamship Mississippi General Steam Navigation Company v. The Owners of the Steamship Utopia The Owners of the Steamship Utopia v. The Owners of the Steamship Merlin and Freight 1878. Re Thornton, Ex parte Thornton Button v. Aves Woodward v. Burdall Harrington v. Marshall and another Thomas v. Harrison and another Appeals from Orders made on Interlocutory The Amazon Tug and Lighterage Company (Limited) v. P. H. Laing Crowle (executrix) v. Russell and another Michael Spanier v. Marchant Re George Joseph Simpson, One, &c. Gallatti v. Wakefield Harwood v. Royal Exchange Assurance Foulkes v. Metropolitan District Railway Company Re Wood, Er parte Hattie Re Francis, Ex parte National Guardian Association Co. Re Wood, Ex parte Musgrave Re Whith, Ex parte Greaner Re Fenton, Ex parte Lithgon Re Pilling, Ex parte Dumoulin Re Treland, Ex parte Jutson Re Spanton, Ex parte Sir L. and W. Jarois Re Shepherd, Ex parte Ball Re Wright, Ex parte Wood Re Shepherd, Ex parte Shepherd Re Pope, Ex parte Gifford Re Rohman, Ex parte Rohman Re Buch, Ex parte Sheriff of Middlesex Re Austin, Ex parte Sheffield Re Austin, Ex parte Sheffield Re Austin, Ex parte Sheffield N.B.-The above List contains Appeals set down to Saturday, Oct. 26, inclusive. LIST OF CAUSES FOR MICHAELMAS SITTINGS, 1878. High Court of Justice. Chancery Division. (Before the MASTER OF THE ROLLS.) Chilton v. Mayor, &c., of The Mayor, &c., of London White v. Earl of Hard wicke Re H. Morel (deceased)→ Grant . Ilinois Midland Appleton v. Mayor, &c., of Steele v. Hutchins Bolton Barbour v. Bolekow Swann v. Bennett Williams v. Jones Bettini v. Bettini Crapper v. Rotherham The Companhia Telegra- Re E. Morel (deceased)- Revell v. Revell Powell v. Burney Venables v. Burney ixon v. Dimsdale Chilton v. Burney rowell & Kindon The Whitehall Colliery Co. Mobberley Martel v Groome The Retford Wagon Co. *. Armstrong Nicholson v. Haselgrave Bane r. Beane Muliner v. The Midland hailway Company Further Considerations. Bahre v. Murrietta Re Walton (deceased)Leask v. Walton Medcalfe v. Latham Finney v. Grice Poirez v. Jefferies Spearing v. Abbott Barnsley v. Collins Haslegrave v. Goodliffe Re Conway (deceased)→ Demurrers. |