award. He had been very much disposed to make an order for the committal of Preston to prison, as not only did he make no apology to the court for acting as he had, but even to the last expressed no regret for what had happened.

Bowey, interposing, said that on behalf of Mr. Preston, he must state that if he had committed a contempt of court he was exceedingly sorry, but at the same time they could not get rid of the conviction that they had a right to do what they

did.

Examining and taking notes of evi- s. d.
dence of each witness..
Above six folios, each additional fol.
(copy)

Draft brief for counsel, per folio
Copy brief, including copy of all neces
sary documents per folio......
(Not limited to any sum.)
Attending counsel (this fee is included
in a lump sum in Ireland)
Notices, copy and service
Perusing notices and advising

(This fee ought to be allowed, par-
ticularly to plaintiff's solicitor on
perusing defendant's statement
of defence).
Attending inspecting documents, per

hour.

In addition to ls. per mile (not exceeding twenty miles) travelling expenses.

Solicitor attending court or registrar to be allowed 1s. per mile travelling expenses.

Usual costs of all necessary letters, and as to search for births, deaths, and marriages, such sum as the registrar may think reasonable. Drawing account or other document not included in costs, and copy, per folio

Every necessary attendance on clients

for instructions

All copies of necessary documents, per folio

3 4

10

1 0

IRISH COUNTY COURTS-EQUITY FEES. THE success of the County Courts as equitable tribunals must astonish and delight the authors of the Act of 1877. Though no official statistics have yet appeared, the accounts we receive from all parts of the country show that the public are availing themselves of the newly-conferred jurisdiction to an extent far exceeding all anticipations. At one sessions in the North of Ireland, twenty-two equity civil bills were entered for We believe that the cause of this unsatisfactory hearing, at another fourteen; and we believe this state of things is that the equity schedule was activity will not be temporary, but permanent-prepared hastily, and without the full consideraunlike the spasmodic outburst of work in the Land Courts which followed the Act of 1870. The reason is obvious: landlords and tenants now understand their positions, and take care to come but little into collision, whilst the causes of equity proceedings must continue as long as human nature exists.

To the farming classes the new practice is an unmixed boon. We will soon have forgotten the rade equity administered by the agint in the dark ages anterior to the Land Act, when the administration of assets, the carrying out of trusts, and payment of debts, were managed in the office by a gentleman whose notice to quit was more effectual than a Lord Chancellor's writ of attachment. The Land Act destroyed the agent's power; he ceased to meddle with the family concerns of the tenantry; so that, until lately, the humbler classes were practically left without redress in many most important particulars. In partnership, administration, and trust cases, where the amount was small, crying injustice had to be endured, because heaven was high, and the Court of Chancery far off." But now such cases are carefully and cheaply investigated on the spot; and the best of it all is-as far as concerns the Profession-that the new business does not interfere with the legitimate

66

tion and consultation with sessional practitioners which the schedules of the other Civil Bill fecs received from the authorities. The local equity jurisdiction was an experiment, a sort of legal leap in the dark; and the attention of the law societies was not specially directed to the fees. We may reasonably presume that the authorities desired to make the new practice popular by making it cheap, but we think they went too far. Every lawyer, every well-wisher of our country, must desire that these cheap Chanceries will succeed; but their success can only be partial and imperfect whilst the solicitors who work the reform are underpaid. On the hearty co-operation of solicitors they depend for success; and their success will not only benefit the country, but increase the revenue, the court fees not being inconsiderable. The present schedule can only be regarded as an experiment.

By the 84th section of the Act, the power of amending the scale of fees is vested in the Lord Chancellor, with the concurrence of a committee of five chairmen. We hope his Lordship may, at an early date, convene a meeting of chairmen pursuant to the 79th section, and reconsider the present scale. The County Court judges know how intricate, troublesome, and tedious are many of the equity cases which even now come before them. The Lord Chancellor now practically

given to Mr. H. W. Frayling, clerk to the Lord Chief Justice, for his long and valued services, and particularly for the manner in which he discharged the duties of chairman for the past five years and that the same be engrossed on vellum and framed." The society then proceeded to elect the officers for the ensuing year, when the following members were elected on the committee of management: Messrs. Allberry, Baily, Cox, Cripps, Freeman, Hall, Jepson, Noad, Spray, and Stewart, with Mr. Wildey as chairman. Messrs. Brothers, Button, and Simpson were re-elected auditors. Ten stewards were then elected to make arrangements for the 47th anniversary dinner to take place in May or June next. Many new members were balloted for, and many gifts granted to members and non-members out of employment and the widows and children of members in distress.

LEGAL NEWS.

THE NEW JUDGE.-Sir J. Fitzjames Stephen, K.C.S.I., Q.C., who has accepted the judgeship in the Exchequer Division of the High Court of Justice, vacated by the resignation of Baron Cleasby, is the eldest son of the late Right Hon. Sir James Stephen, K.C.B., and was born in March 1829. He was educated at Eton, King's College, London, and Trinity College, Cambridge, where he graduated B.A. in 1852, and proceeded to M.A. in 1856. He was called to the bar at the

Inner Temple in 1854, and went the Midland Circuit. In 1859 he was appointed recorder of Newark-on-Trent, which post he resigned in Dec. 1869, on being appointed to succeed Sir Henry Sumner Maine as Legal Member of the Council of the Government of India, which he held until April 1872, when he returned to this country. During his stay in India he successfully laboured, to consolidate and simplify the law, and he has been similarly employed since he returned home on the English criminal law, the elaborate scheme which he published a short time since being received with marked approval by both Bench and Bar. The new judge was counsel for the Rev. Rowland Williams, when that gentleman was tried before the Court of Arches on a charge of heresy preferred against him by Dr. Hamilton, then Bishop of Salisbury. He is an LL.D. of London University, was created Q.C. in 1869, and K.C.S.I. in 1877. He was an unsuccessful candidate for the representation of Harwich in 1865, and a short time since for the recordership of London, on the resignation of Mr. Russell Gurney. Sir James is the author of a General View of the Criminal Law of England, 1863, and other works on legal subjects; of Essays by a Barrister, a reprint from a weekly paper, in 1862; and of Liberty and Fraternity, published in 1873. He has recently taken up his pen in the Afghan controversy, in opposition to Lord Lawrence, Sir William Harcourt, &c. Sir James married Miss Mary Richenda Cunningham, daughter of the late Rev. J. W. CunningBaron of the Exchequer," but simply a judge of that division of the High Court

as if a fresh vein of legal ore had been struck. All this is very satisfactory. It is pleasant to know that justice has been brought home to the dwellings of the poor; that really and at last, no wrong is without a remedy; but it is far from satisfactory to have to state that the remuneration awarded to solicitors for their share of this desirable reform is sadly inadequate; yet such is the fact. Complaints on this score reach us from all sides, and there is not the least doubt but that dissatisfaction with the present arrangements is deep and widespread. It is complained that the existing schedule is incomplete and inadequate, that many items are wholly omitted, and that the result is to pay the solicitor very badly for his work and labour. For instance, the sum of £5 is the maximum allowed for preparing and vouching the account of an executor or administrator or other accounting party, including all attendances on the clerk of the peace taking the account. It is obvious that in many cases this must be too little. Suppose the account to contain several hundred items-no uncommon occurrence-and the clerk of the peace's office to be twenty miles distant from the office of the solicitor on recordas often occurs-the solicitor may have to make a number of long journeys with the account and vouchers before the inquiry can be closed; yet for such journeys no allowance is made. In England, solicitors attending court or registrar,' are allowed 1s. per mile travelling expenses up to twenty miles, which is only fair and reasonable. By a ridiculous and utterly unjust fiction, the taxing master holds that every solicitor is resident in Dublin; but at the same time to hold that he is resident in every county town in Ireland seems to cap the climax of absurdity. Again, English solicitors are allowed 6s. Sd. per hour attending inspecting documents," for which no allowance is made in Ireland. Briefs in England are not limited to any fixed sum, as here. The following are the principal discrepancies between the two

schedules:

he hears, how important are the legal questions involved, and how lengthy the accounts. They show that the story of the poor is anything but short and simple.' It cannot but be seen that the present scale of fees is inadequate; and the complaints of the Profession are entitled to a hearing in courtesy, and to redress in common justice.-Irish Law Times.

LAW SOCIETIES.

SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION THE usual monthly meeting of the board of directors of this association was held at the Law Institution, Chancery-lane, London, on Wednesday last, 8th Jan., Mr. Sidney Smith in the chair. The other directors present were-Messrs. Brook, Gregory, M.P., Hedger, Price, Rickman, Roscoe, Rose, and Woolbert; Mr. Eiffe, secretary. sum of £130 was distributed in grants of relief, business transacted. ten new members were admitted, and other general

UNITED LAW CLERKS' SOCIETY. THE annual general meeting of the members of this society was held on Monday evening last, in the Lecture Hall of the Inner Temple, Mr. H. W. Frayling in the chair. The minutes and the acts of the committee having been confirmed, the chairman gave a short outline of the position of the society, which showed that, notwithstanding the many death, superannuation, and sick claims during the past twelve months, the committee had been enabled to add no less a sum than £1500 to the reserve fund, which on the 31st Dec. 1878 the motions was one moved by Mr. Rogers, was only a few pounds short of £60,000. Among seconded by Mr. Heuson, and carried with applause, That the best thanks of the society be

annum, the latter sum being the average of the fees received during the past three years.

THE CENTENARY OF LORD BROUGHAM.-The town of Cannes has decided on celebrating the centenary of the birth of Lord Brougham. A committee has been appointed, with the mayor for president, and a programme of the fetes to be held is already drawn up. They will come off in the course of April next. Cannes will be paying a debt of gratitude in rendering homage to the memory of Lord Brougham, for to this illustrious man it owes a large part of its prosperity. In 1841 Cannes had something less than 4000 inhabitants, in 1877 it had more than 14,000, and it is now the third town in the department of the Alpes-Maritimes. Strangers (English above all) have had a large share in this increase. In 1831 Lord Brougham proposed making a tour in Italy. The police of King Charles Albert, afraid lest he might bring the cholera with him, forbade him entrance into the kingdom. He then journeyed through the environs of Cannes, and was so delighted with the softness of its climate, the beauty of the sea, and the charms of the country, that he decided on passing a good part of his life in that earthly paradise. When Lord Brougham purchased a villa there, it quickly became known in England, and soon many other English villas sprung up around. In 1848 Lord Brougham applied to become a naturalised French subject, wishing, at the same time, to remain an English subject also. M. Crémieux told his Lordship, with all imaginable compliments, that this was not possible, and the matter dropped; but the remembrance of this proceeding of the noble lord will add to the cordial eagerness with which the centenary of his birth will be celebrated on French soil.

- Mr.

BANKRUPTCY LEGISLATION AND DEFAULTERS IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION.-Messrs. Francis K. Munton and Robert Everett have awarded the first prize of thirty guineas to Mr. Herbert T. Round, LL.B.; the second prize of twenty guineas to Mr. George Wreford; and the third prize of ten guineas to Mr. W. H. Hazard. They have also given certificates of merit to the following gentlemen (alphabetical order): Walter Mills, Mr. James Rigby Smith, and Mr. James White. The prize money has been duly distributed, and, at Sir Henry Peek's request, each certificate of merit was supplemented with a cheque for five guineas. The proceeds of the sale of the reprint of newspaper correspondence has been paid over to the funds of the Solicitors' Benevolent Association. Unsuccessful papers (sealed up with motto indorsed) will be returned on application to Sir Joseph Causton and Sons, Eastcheap, E.C.

THE JURY PANEL.-The following letter has been addressed by Lord Chief Justice Coleridge to the High Bailiff of Leicester:-"1, Sussex-square, W., 20th Dec. 1878.-Sir, I beg leave to call your attention to the law as to the formation of the ordinary or common jury panel. Every one liable to be a juror at all is liable to serve on common juries, and special jurors are not by law, and ought not to be in practice, excluded from the common jury panel. The special jurors are liable to serve on both panels. This is the clear law, and has repeatedly been declared to be the law by judges of the highest authority. It is, however, habitually violated by the under-sheriffs in many counties, who, in defiance of the law and the remonstrance of judges, persist in excluding special jurors from the common jury panel, both in the criminal and civil court. I do not know whether the town of Leicester is one of such places, and I have no means of dealing with a deputy-bailiff. But I am sure you will forgive me for drawing your attention to an important part of your duty in relation to the administration of justic. You are by law responsible for the jury list supplied to the judges, at the foot of which list your name is signed, and I beg leave to intimate to you that I at least must so hold you, and must enforce the performance of this part of your duty, if the deputy-bailiff in your town has been in the habit of violating it on your behalf, by all such means as the law places at my disposal. It is only fair to you to inform you beforehand of the views I entertain of your duty and my own, and I trust that I have done this with all the courtesy which the nature of the communication permits me to show.-I am, Sir, your obedient servant, COLERIDGE, C.J.-The High Bailiff of Leicester."-"B." writes to the Times:-"Sir,Nothing can be more wrong than the complaint of 'An Under-Sheriff' in the Times of to-day. He is as wrong as Lord Coleridge is right. By the law of the land persons qualified to serve as special jurymen have always been and are bound to serve as common or ordinary jurymen, their special service being in addition to their ordinary. By a mistake, the cause of which is well known, but with which you need not be troubled, common to all those throughout England and Wales who have had the arranging of the jury panels and determining who should serve on them-i.e., under-sheriffs and others having like offices-persons qualified to serve on special have not been returned to serve on common juries. This has gone on for more

than half a century, in spite of remonstrances and exposure of the error. It was always contrary to the law, and had this scandalous consequence-that a trumpery civil cause for a few pounds was referred to a picked jury, while a man was tried for his life before another jury of the residuum, the picked men being picked out of it. This, as I say, has been complained of repeatedly. It has been twice reported against by commissions, of the last of which the Lord Chancellor, Lord Penzance, Lord Hatherley, Lord Selborne, Lord Blackburn, the Chief Justice of England, and Lord Coleridge were members. A few years back, an Act of Parliament passed insisting on the law being observed and expressly enacting that special jurymen should serve on the common or ordinary jury. But, partly from the inveterate prepossession of the under-sheriff's that a special juryman was different from and not a common juryman, and in some instances, perhaps, to avoid complaints from special jurymen, the law has been disregarded. In some places, owing to the interference of the judges, as in Middlesex and London, the law is obeyed; but in the country generally it has not been. I suppose I need not prove that it ought to be. In the first place, it is the law; in the second place, it is a good law. It is the duty of the judges to see that it is obeyed. There is no one else who can enforce it; it is their precept which is disregarded. There are two ways of doing this-one way is to say nothing beforehand, but to fine a sheriff who has not returned a proper jury, leaving him to seek his remedy against his under-sheriff. This would be vigorous and striking. Another way is that of Lord Coleridge-to write beforehand, to prevent the offence, instead of letting it be committed and then punishing it, and to write as obliging and courteous a letter as could be penned, pointing out the reasons for what is required as well as the consequences of disregarding its performance. 'An Under-Sheriff' thinks that this is in questionable taste, and doubts if it is not unconstitutional, as influencing the sheriff in his selection of the jury. He supposes that under-sheriffs have incurred Lord Coleridge's displeasure, because his Lordship shows that sheriffs can avoid being fined by making under-sheriffs do their duty and observe

the law."

COMPLAINT AGAINST A RECORDER. The Press Association reports that the Faversham magistrates have petitioned the Lord Chancellor in reference to the conduct of their Recorder, who, i. is said, has several times failed to attend at the quarter sessions or send a substitute, after fixing a date for holding the session. The Recorder failed to attend in his place last week.

RUMOURED RESIGNATION OF BARON CLEASBY. -We understand that Baron Cleasby has tendered his resignation. He was born in 1806, educated at Eton and Trinity College, Cambridge, called to the bar in 1831, became a Queen's Counsel in 1861, and was appointed a Baron of the Exchequer iu November 1868, when he was knighted. In November 1875 he became a Judge of the High Court of Justice (Exchequer Division). The learned judge was very popular, and his retirement will be generally regretted.-Globe.

Devon amounted to £952 for the past quarter, as JUSTICES' clerks' salaries in the county of against fees received, £1344.

THE coronership of the Totnes district is vacant by the resignation of Mr. H. Michelmore, consequent upon his election to the position of clerk of the peace for Devon; and Mr. R. R. Rodd is taking the duties pending the appointment of his suc

gentleman who, we are sorry to say, is a solicitor. Writs are subsequently issued by the same solicitor giving his address "at the office" of the debt collectors. Of course, if solicitors allow their names to be made use of in this manner, there seems to be no remedy through which we may condemn such irregular practices. JOHN HALL AND SON. [Copy.] Manchester Chambers, 46, Market-street, Manchester, 23rd Dec. 1878. W. H. Connor,

Solicitor to Ferran, Nephew, and Co.

B 1852. Sir, I have been instructed by Messrs. Ferran, Nephew, and Co. to apply to you for payment of the sum of, &c.

this very ordinary letter. The singular feature is that [It does not appear necessary to publish the rest of a solicitor should state who are his clients in the manner here adopted. There is a very summary remedy for solicitors who allow other people to use their names, but we do not gather that it is done in the case before us.-ED. SOL.'S DEPT.]

INJUNCTIONS IN BANKRUPTCY.-It is stated in your last that the present practice of granting interim injunctions in the London Bankruptcy Court is to be discontinued, and that in future creditors will be restrained until after the first meeting. At the end of the paragraph a doubt is suggested whether this " 'simplification of proce dure will be adopted by the County Courts exercising bankruptcy jurisdiction. I am rather amused at this, because several of the County Court registrars, including myself, have acted upon the proposed procedure for years. In this court it has certainly been the practice since 1870, and I believe it to be well established in many others. I recommend this fact especially to the attention of the esteemed correspondent" who wrote about the eccentricities of the County Courts acting in bankruptcy in February last. Sunderland, Jan. 6.

66

ROBT. K. A. ELLIS,

TAXATION OF COSTS.-In your issues of the 21st and 28th ult. I notice with great pleasure your comments upon the delay in taxing costs in the Chancery Division of the High Court. In support of the proposition you there make, and in order to show you that I am affected by the delay in question, I beg to say that a petition in Chancery for the appointment of new trustees in an estate having been heard and closed before the long vacation, my agents have been unable to get an appointment to tax the costs before the 23rd inst. A NOTTINGHAM S. S. C. AND SUBSCRIBER.

NOTES AND QUERIES.

None are inserted unless the name and address of the writer are sent, not necessarily for publication, but as s guarantee for bona fides.

Queries.

32. STAMP DUTY.-By deed dated in 1867 a principal sum was transferred by one lender to another, and also a sum of interest accrued due at the date of deed which was stamped with ad valorem duty in respect of the principal sum only, but no duty was paid or the deed stamped in anywise in respect of the accrued interest. Could this be correct, or how should the deed have been stamped? Please cite case or authority if possible. ILEX.

[The Stamp Act provided for the duty payable upon a transfer of mortgage with a further sum advancedED. SOL.'S DEPT ]

33. BANKRUPTCY.-A., whose creditors have resolved on a composition under the Bankruptcy Act 1869, seeks to make a title to property, pending the arrangement. so against a subsequent adjudication (under s. 125, cl. (See Hoare, Re Walton, 43 L. J. 38, Bank.) Can he do 11), by the Court, or upon the petition of a creditor not entered in the debtor's statement? J. A. S. M.

PROMOTIONS AND APPOINTMENTS.

NOTA BENE.-Information intended for publication under the above heading should reach us not later than Thurs day morning in each week, as publication is otherwise delayed.

MR. CHARLES EDWARD HOWELL, of the firm of Howell, Jones, and Howell, solicitors, Welshpool, has been appointed by Lord Coleridge a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds executed by Married Women for the county of Montgomery.

Mr. JAMES DUNDAS DOWN, solicitor, has been appointed Clerk and Treasurer to the Trustees of the Dorking Charities. Mr. Down was admitted in 1842.

MR. R. H. MOORE has been appointed by the Lord Chancellor to be High Bailiff of the Bath County Court, in succession to the late Mr. W. Lewis.

MR. ALFRED Henry Gardner, of the firm of Wightwick and Gardner, solicitors, Folkestone and Sandgate, has been appointed Treasurer of the borough of Folkestone, in succession to Mr. E. Kingsford, resigned. Mr. Gardner was ad

MR. JAMES M'KEEVER, solicitor, Wigton, Thursday Cumberland, has been appointed by the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas to be a petual Commissioner.

Per

MR. HARRY FINDEN DAVIES, of the firm of W. H. and H. F. Davies, solicitors, Westonsuper-Mare, has been appointed Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

MR. ALBERT E. SHAPLAND, of the firm of Messrs. J. T. Shapland and Son, solicitors, South Molton, has been appointed Conservative Registration Agent for the district of South Molton, in the Northern Division of Devonshire, in the room of his deceased father, Mr. J. T. Shapland.

MR. GEORGE WHALE, of Woolwich, Kent, and of 3, Furnival's-inn, E. C., solicitor, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer Oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

MR. JOHN CROSS has been appointed Clerk to the Norwich Board of Guardians, in succession to Mr. E. Crosier Bailey, solicitor, resigned.

MR. T. H. R. BARTLEY, Adelphi Bank-chambers, Liverpool, has been appointed a Commissioner to administer oaths in the Supreme Court of South Australia, the Supreme Court of New South Wales, and the Supreme Court of the colony of Victoria.

MR. FREDERICK ROWLAND ROBERTS, solicitor, Aberystwith, clerk of the peace for Cardiganshire, has been appointed Auditor of magistrates' clerks' fees and accounts for that county.

MR. UPPERTON LEAR, Solicitor, Arundel, who was admitted in 1871, has been appointed Clerk to the Littlehampton Ferry Trustees, in succession to Mr. R. French, solicitor, deceased.

MR. FREDERICK HENRY BARTLETT, solicitor, 6. Victoria-street, Westminster, has been ap: pointed Assistant in the Conveyancing Branch of the Solicitors' Department of the Metropolitan Board of Works, at a salary of £350 per annum. Mr. Bartlett was admitted in 1866.

Thursday

Friday. Saturday. Monday Tuesday Wednesday

22 Appeal motions ex parte, appeals from orders made on interlocutory motions, and other appeals

23 Bankruptcy appeals and other

5 Appeal motions ex parte, appeals from orders made on interlocutory motions, and other appeals

6 Bankruptcy appeals and other appeals

7 Appeals

8 Ditto

10 Ditto

11

Ditto

......... 12 Appeal motions ex parte, appeals from orders made on interlocutory motions, and other appeals

MR. JAMES CAMPBELL, solicitor, has been re- Thursday appointed Under-sheriff of the city of Dublin for the ensuing year.

MR. A. J. HUGHES, solicitor, has been appointed County Treasurer for Cardiganshire, in succession to the late Mr. B. Price Jordan, solicitor.

MR SAMUEL CHARLES WILMOT, of Fairford, in the county of Gloucester, solicitor, has been appointed by the Lord Chancellor a Commissioner to administer oaths in the Supreme Court of Judicature.

THE COURTS

19 Appeal motions ex parte, appeals

from orders made on interlo

cutory motions, and other appeals

20 Bankruptcy appeals and other

PAPERS.

Monday Tuesday Wednesday

3 Ditto

4 Ditto

5 Appeal motions ex parte, appeals from orders made on interlocutory motions, and other appeals

6 Bankruptcy appeals and other

appeals

Thursday Friday

16 Ditto

Saturday

29 Appeal motions er parte, appeals from orders made on interlocutory motions, and other

Monday

Tuesday

21

Ditto

Wednesday

22

Ditto

appeals

Thursday

23 Ditto

Bankruptcy appeals and other

Friday

appeals Appeals

Saturday

25

Saturday

Monday

Wednesday

29 Ditto

Tuesday

Thursday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday....

Adjourned

summonses

and

Monday

Further considerations will be taken as part of the general paper in priority to original causes which have not already appeared in the paper.

Unopposed petitions must be presented and copies left with the secretary on or before the Thursday preceding the Saturday on which it is intended they should be heard; 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 must be left in court with the judge's officer the day before the cause is to be put in the paper.

(Before V.C. MALINS.)

At Lincoln's-inn.

Jan. 11 Motions and general paper 13 General paper

14 Ditto

15 Ditto

16 Motions and general paper

17 Short causes, petitions, and

21 General paper

23 Motions, adjourned summonses, and general paper

24 General paper

25 Petitions, short causes, and general paper

27 In bankruptcy

30 Motions, adjourned summonses,

general paper

3 In bankruptcy

Thursday Friday

Saturday

28 General paper

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

11 Ditto

Saturday

and general paper

Monday

General paper

Tuesday

Petitions, short causes, and

Wednesday

19 Ditto

Thursday

4 General paper

Friday. Saturday

21

Petitions and general paper

22

Short causes, adjourned sun.

General paper

Wednesday

5 Ditto

Thursday

Wednesday

22

Ditto

and general paper

Tuesday

Thursday

Friday.

7 General paper

Wednesday

Saturday

8

Petitions, short

general paper

general paper.

Adjourned

summonses

10 In bankruptcy

general paper

Tuesday.

11

General paper

Monday

27 General paper

Wednesday

12 Ditto

Monday

Tuesday

28 Ditto

Thursday

13

Motions, adjourned summonses,

Tuesday

Wednesday

29 Ditto

and general paper

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday......

31

Short causes, petitions, and

Saturday

general paper

general paper

Tuesday

General paper

Wednesday

19 Ditto

Tuesday

4 Ditto

Thursday

Wednesday

5 Ditto

Thursday

Friday..

Saturday

6 Motions and general paper

7 Short causes, petitions, and general paper

8 Adjourned summonses

general paper

10 General paper

13 Motions and general paper

14 Short causes, petitions, and

general paper

general paper

Friday

Saturday

and

Monday

14 General paper

15 Petitions, short causes, and

general paper

17 In bankruptcy

18 General paper

20 Motions, adjourned summonses,

and general paper

21 General paper

22 Petitions, short causes, and

general paper

24 In bankruptcy

Tuesday

25 General paper

Tuesday

Wednesday

26 Ditto

Wednesday

Thursday

27 Motions, adjourned summonses,

Thursday

and general paper

Friday..

General paper

Saturday

Saturday March 1

Petitions, short causes, and

general paper

Monday

In bankruptcy

Tuesday

Tuesday

4 General paper

Wednesday

Wednesday

5 Ditto

Thursday

18 Ditto

Thursday

6 Motions, adjourned summonses,

Friday.

and general paper

Saturday

General paper

8

general paper

Tuesday

and

general paper

Monday Tuesday

10 In bankruptey

Wednesday

11 General paper

Thursday

Wednesday

12 Ditto

Friday.

Thursday

Saturday.

Friday.

Saturday.

Monday

4 Ditto

Thursday

20

Motions, adjourned summonses, and general paper

6 Motions and general paper

7 Short causes, petitions, and

general paper

8 Adjourned summonses

general paper

10 General paper

13 Motions and general paper

14 Short causes, petitions, and

general paper

15 Adjourned summonses

general paper

17 General paper

18 Ditto

20 Motions and general paper 21 Short causes, petitions, and

general paper

22 Adjourned summonses

general paper

24 General paper

25 Ditto

General paper

Saturday.

22

and

Monday

Thursday..

Petitions, short causes, and general paper

24 In bankruptcy

25 General paper

27 Motions, adjourned summonses,

and general paper

28 General paper

29 Petitions, short causes, and

general paper

31 In bankruptcy

Wednesday

3 General paper

4 Ditto

5 Ditto

6 Motions and general paper 7 Petitious and general paper 8 Short causes, adjourned sum. monses, and general paper

10 General paper

12 Ditto

13 Motions and general paper 14 Petitions and general paper 15 Short causes, adjourned summonses, and general paper 17 General paper

18 Ditto

20 Motions and general paper Petitions and general paper

21

22 Short causes, adjourned summonses, and general paper 24 General paper

25 Ditto

26 Ditto

27 Motions and general paper 28 Petitions and general paper 29 Short causes, adjourned summonses, and general paper 31 General paper

April i

Ditto

2 Ditto

3 Motions and general paper

4 Petitions and general paper

5 Short causes, adjourned sum. monses, and general paper

7 General paper

9 Motions and general 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.

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 must be left in court with the judge's officer the day before the cause is to be put in the paper.

11 Ditto

19 Ditto

8

Ditto

Krehlr. Burrell

For Hearing.-Remanets.

New

Mirehouse v. Barnett
Peebles v. Henwood
ReOrd (deceased)-Dickin-
son v. Dickinson
Thomas r. Mytton

Be The Thames Iron Ship Building Company (Limited)

Pheysey. Pheysey
Pettitt v. Wiseman

Be The Cathedral Tin and
Copper Mining Company
Ellison r. Mercer
Aorton e. London and
North-Western Railway
Company

1878.

Appeals.

Lee v. Nuttall

Smith v. Dynevor, &c. Col-
lieries Company
Wheeldon v. Burrows
Loits v. Foster

Re The Boscawell Downs
Tin, &c. Association
Liverpool District Regis-
try-Sedgwick v. Ahearn
Binney v. Lincolne
Nelson, Doukin, and Co. v.
Dahl and Co.
Cater v. Barker
Wegmann

v.

Corcoran, Witt, and Co.-Same v. Same

From Orders made on Interlocutory Motions in the Chancery Division. 1878.

Appeals from the Common Pleas Division.
For Judgment.

Bryant v. Lefever and another
Button v. O'Neill

Hayn, Roman, and Co. v. Culliford and another
The London and Brighton Railway Company v. Watson
For Hearing.-Remanets.
1876.
Mayor, &c., of London v. London Joint-Stock Bank
Grant and another v. The Banque Franco Egyptienne
and another

Reuter, Hufeland and Co. v. Sala and Co.
1878.

Hutton v. The Panty-y-Mwyn Lead Mining Company
Woodward ". Burdall
Lees v. Malins and others
Foster v. Wright

New Appeals.

Wyatt v. Wild and Co.

Ball v. Plummer

Harvey v. M'Guire

Appeals from Orders made on Interlocutory Motions in the Common Law Divisions. 1878.

Sharp v. The Metropolitan District Railway Company Runts v. Sheffield

Forster v. Quelch and another

v.

Dryden, Trading, &c., v. Eliazarian

Dryden, Trading, &c., v. Eliazarian

Re Commercial Bank (Li-
mited)

Re The South Durham
Iron Company (Limited)

Appeals from the Queen's Bench Division.
For Judgment.

Drew v. Nunn

Steel, Marshall and Co. v. Foy, Morgan and Co.

Appeals from the Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Divisions.

For Hearing.-Remanets.

The Inman Steamship Company (Limited) v. The owners of the Lauretta

Perkins and Homer . The Owners of the Condor and Freight

North German Lloyds, Owners of the Move and others v. The Owners of the Fusi Yama and Freight General Steam Navigation Company . The Owners of the Steamship Utopia

The Owners of the Steamship Utopia v. The Owners of the Steamship Merlin and Freight.

New Appeals.

Re Smith, Er parte Bright and Brothers
Re Marlow, Ex parte Field and Co.
Re Marcus, Ex parte The Trustee
Re Florence, Ex parte Wingfield
Re Bonham, Ex parte M'Donnell
Re Bonham, Ex parte M'Donnell
Re Hart, Ex parte Fletcher

Re Lomas, Ex parte Mutual Indemnity Company
Re Hare, Ex parte Welchman

Re Matson, Ex parte Hunt
Re Woods, Ex parte Ditton

Re Larem, Er parte Cooper

Re Hoffman, Er parte Carr

Ex parte Pumfrey, Ex parte Hillman
Re Whitting, Ex parte Hall

Re Richmond, Ex parte Langton.

N.B.-The above List contains Appeals set down to Monday, Jan. 6, inclusive.

LIST OF CAUSES FOR HILARY SITTINGS, 1879. High Court of Justice.

Chancery Division.

(Before the MASTER OF THE ROLLS.)
Causes with Witnesses.
Baker v. Day
Balls v. Lewis

Duke of Westminster v.
Tattershall

The Mayor, &c., of London
v. Chilton
Chilton . Mayor, &c., of
London

Jones v. Griffiths

Crapper V. Rotherham
Skating Rink Co.
Thomson v. Fonnereau
Chilton v. Burney

Jewett v. London Bank
Association

Formby v. Lethbridge
Powell . Kindon
Nicholson v. Haslegrave
Rumer v. Carver
Murray v. Clarke
Mulliner . Midland Rail-
way Company
Atlantic Mutual Insurance
Co. v. Huth
Besant v. Wood
Currie . Gibbon
Leighton . Lloyd
Sheppard v. Chandler
Oliver v. Meredith
Whybrow . Berlandina
Riches v. Duguenoy
Crapper v. Simpson
Widdowson v. Milner
Townsend &. Dewhurst
Crossland v. Tenuaut
Hodson v. Cayless
Green v. Kellett
Cornwall v. Burrows
Sangster v. Birtwhistle
Parker v. Pinkney

Emma Silver Mining Com-
pany v. Grant

Further

Bevington v. Batey
Metcalfe v. Hutchinson
Nicholls . Olver
Aldis v. Bashford

Gillott v. Harborne Rail-
way Company
Tildesley . Metropolitan
and St. John's Wood
Railway Company
Clarke v.London and South
Western Bank
Maule r. Burton

Re George (deceased)-
George v. George
Schut v. Hall

Wildman v. Wildman
Attorney-Gen. v. Amherst
Re Dillon (deceased)
Ansell c. Thunder.
Burton . Maule
Cowderoy e. Brooks
Ladd v. Hartopp.
Union Bank of London v.
Ingram

Baynes v. Flower
Jones v. Blessley
Kite v. North Metropolitan
Tramways Company
Moody v. Steggles
Kanken . Longbourne
Boddington ". Hamilton
Robertson v. Aubertin
English v. Dempster
Corbish v. Coward

Re J. Alderson (deceased)
-Alderson . Eastwood
Monro v. Such

Lowenthal v. Atkins
Dent r. Learoyd

Dent v. The Sovereign Life
Assurance Co.

Bircham v. Freshwater
Considerations.

Murrell v. Ferryman
Truman v. Truman
Sharp v. Lush

Low v. King

Causes without Witnesses.

Appeals from the London Bankruptcy Court.

Re White, Ex parte Greener

Re Pilling, Ex parte Dumoulin

Re Ireland, Ex parte Swithinback

Re Spanton, Ex parte Sir L. W. Jarvis

Re Shepherd, Ex parte Ball

Re White, Ex parte Wood

Re Shepherd, Ex parte Shepherd

Re Pope, Er parte Gifford

Re Buck, Ex parte Sheriff of Middlesex

Re Austin, Ex parte Sheffield

Re Austin, Ex parte Sheffield

Re Austin, Ex parte Sheffield

Re Bond, Ex parte Outley Assurance Society

Re Nathan, Ex parte Stapleton

Lesy v. Darnton

Re

Teall (deceased) French r. Andrews

Re Kickard (deceased) -
James v. Davies
Ratcliff v. Vernon
May v. May

Dollman v. Jones
Bunbury v. Gardner
De Rosaz v. Ross
Bingham v. Bingham
Fothergill . Hankey

Dresser v. Gleadow

Vernon v. Vestry of St.
James'

Nicholson . Vestry of Mile Broad v. Chapman

End Old Town

Small v. Chamberlain Chamberlain v. Small Thomson, Wylie and Co. v. Saxby

Massam r. Thorley's Cattle

Food Company Norton v. Mansel Hawksworth v.

British Land Company (Limited)

Jones v. Abraham
Bell v. Dent

Bull v. Board of Manage-
ment of West London
Re Moseley - Merrill
Merrill

Sutcliffe v. Sutcliffe
Morton v. Warren
Re Archdeacon (deceased)
-Tupper v. Nicholls