James, Thomas, 15, Manor-pl.; Huntingdon Jennings, Edward Billett, 28, Grove-pl., Brompton; Leeds Jones, William, Wrexham Kelsall, Frederick Henry, 14, Upper Porchesterstreet, Paddington Kent, Benjamin, Newcastle Kent, Edmund, jun., 6, Albion-terrace, Sydenham-park To whom Articled, Assigned, &c. J. Hampson, Manchester Hearn and Nelson, Buckingham J. Clark, Sessions-house, Old Bailey F. Herbert, Royal Avenue-terr., King's-rd., Chelsea E. C. Holmes, Bedford-1ow F. Every, Exeter; W. H. Murch, Mansion-houseplace J. B. Lloyd, Liverpool C. Hyde, Ely-place W. Fowler, Huntingdon E. Kent, sen., Fakenham Kent, Thomas Russel, 1, Bath-place, Kensington. B. Blundell, Mitre-ct, Temple; I'. Nelson, Essex-st., . Letts, John, jun., 8, Bartlett's-bldgs., Holborn Lucas, Thos. Edw., 9, Taunton-pl., Regent's-park. M'Gee, Fras. William, 21, New Millman-street; Everton, near Liverpool. Maclure, Bowman, Harley-st., Cavendish-square; Mander, Chs. John, 38, Ladbrook-sq.; Little Ealing D.Cornthwaite, Old Jewry-chambers T. Taylor, Manchester C. Meredith, Lincoln's-inn O. Hyde, Cambridge R. Wilton, Gloucester Miller, Mark Ben., 18, Chalcot-villas, Haverstock-hill M. B. Miller, Chifford's-inn Attorneys to be Admitted. Clerks' Names and Residences. Neesom, John, 3, Claremont-pl., Dalston; Doncaster Newman, Charles, 127, Albany-st.; Hemingfield Newman, Mitchell William, 42, Downshire Hill, Hampstead; Cheltenham Norris, Robert, jun., 7, Denmark-street, Islington; Liverpool Overton, Edw. Fras., 15, Green-terr., Clerkenwell Owen, Meilir, Bangor Owston, Hiram Abiff, 15, Compton st., East; Leicester Parker, Arnold, 79, Lower Calthorpe-street, Middlesex; Endcliffe, near Sheffield Parker, Henry Watson, 84, Westbourne-parkvillas; Arlington-street; Oakley-square Parker, James, 16, Cowley-st., Westminster; Kings's-bench-walk Palmer, Gillies Charles, Grantham, Lincolnshire Phillips, Thomas, General Post-office; 35, Cambridge-terr., Clapham-road Phillips, William Henry, 39, Frederick-s:reet, Gray's-inn-road; Wolverhampton . Ponsonby, John, Oldham Poole, Fenwick Thomas, 12, Kennington-grean; Lambeth; Frome Rammell, Harby, 1, Hereford-sq., Old Brompton Rankin, William, 2, Sussex-place, Islington. Reynolds, Reginald, 2, King-st., Portman-square; Clifton; Bristol Sheppard, Thomas Pollett, 3, Ranelagh-grove, Smith, Edw. Hart, 5, Lindsey-pl., Chelsea; Belgrave-st.; Spencer-st.; Exeter Smith, William, Green-terr., Clerkenwell; New Ormond-st.; and Weston-super-Mare Snowball, George, Sunderland Stacey, William, 14, Soley-street, Pentonville Stevens, George Chubb, Chardstock, near Chard, Somerset; Guernsey Stevenson, James Richard, 8, Ampton-st., Gray'sinn-road; King's-road; Birkenhead Stockwood, John, Cowbridge Stubbs, Edward Phillips, 35, Grove-pl., Brompton; Maidstone Stuckey, Joseph Fry, 21, St. James's-st.; Bridport Talbot, Frederic, Kidderminster Teebay, Richard, Everton, near Liverpool Thomas, William Thos., 42, Hall-street, City-road; Carmarthen Thornley, James Jonathan, 12, Canterbury-place, Walworth; Macclesfield Tindell, Wm. Fred., 7, Rockingham-row East, New Kent-road; 48, High-street, Southwark. Turner, Geo., 2, Great Percy-st.; Claremont-sq. Turner, Hubert Francis, 12, The Terrace, Kilburn, Middlesex To whom Articled, Assigned, &c. F. Fisher; F. W. Fisher, Doncaster J. Birks, Hemingfield 481 R.J. Ticehurst, Cheltenham; J. Croft, Basinghall street R. Norris, sen., Liverpool G. Overton, Merthyr Tydvil W, Owen, Bangor G. Toller, Leicester Thos. Jas. Parker, Sheffield R. Few, Henrietta-street, Covent-garden R. Cheere, King's-bench-walk Wm. Ostler, Grantham M. B. Peacock, General Post-office; lighgate T. M. Phillips, Wolverhampton J II. Hulme, Manchester Thomas E. Poole, Frome J. S. Burn, Copthall-court Edward George Craig, Braintree, Essex : T. Edwards, C. E. Ward, Bristol Richard Rodd, East Stonehouse, Devonshire Clerks' Names and Residences, Tweed, Thos., 4, Alfred-place, Bedford-square Vassall, Robert Lowe Grant, 21, Frederick-street, Gray's-inn-road; Bristol Venn, Francis, 1, St. James's road, Liverpool Vivian, Charles Augustus, l'encalenick, Lr. Truro, Cornwall; Craven street, Strand Wade, John Henry, 7, King's-bench-walk, Temple Walker, Joseph, Kingston-upon-Hull; Liverpool. Waller, Rt., 30, Westbourne-terr.; Wolverhampton Warner, George Daniel, 9, Kensington-square Warwick, James Bailey, 17, Upper North-place, Gray's-inn-road; New Sleaford Waugh, Geo., jun., Worthing, Sussex Wheldon, Rt., jun., 5, Barton-st., Westminster; North Shields Whitefield, John Chas., 34, Penton-pl., Pentonville; Bristol . To whom Articled, Assigned, &c. T. Tweed, Lincoln; G. T. Tweed, Lincoln's-innfields A. Cox, Bristol; J. S. Toor, Bedford-row William Shuttleworth, Liverpool John Vivian, Pencalenick, Cornwall M. P. Moore, New Sleaford, Lincolushire G. Waugh, sen., Great James-st.; R. Edmunds, J. Wright; J. L. Barker; South Shields J. E. Lawton; W. Gregory; Leicester H. W. Ravenscroft, Gray's-inn-sq.; W. Craven, J. B. Millington, Boston J. Lofthouse; R. Barr; Leeds Added to the List pursuant to Judge's Orders. Beardsall, Thomas, Manchester It appears that Mr. Tyrrell, the learned Judge of the Exeter County Court, has decided that the Bar is not entitled to exclusive audience in insolvent cases-holding that the County Court did not act in those cases as a branch of the Insolvent Debtors' Court in London, but under the statute giving jurisdiction to the Courts established under the 9 & 10 Vict. c. 95. This accords with the judgment of Mr. Serjeant Dowling, at the County Court at York, see ante, vol. 39, p. 338; and which judgment was approved by the then Attorney and Sclicitor-General, now the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, and the Master of the Rolls. Horatio Barnett, Walsall R. Armitstead, Whitebaven; C. H. Bower, and T. H. Bower, 46, Chancery-lane H. Wellington Vallance, Tokenhouse-yard R. F. Dalrymple, Parliament-st.; E. W. Johnson, Chichester H. Perry, Whitehaven; W. Perry, Ditto; G. Helder, Great James-st. J. J. Peddell, 14, Cheapside NEW JUDGE OF THE MARYLEBONE COUNTY COURT. WE are informed that Mr. Amos has resigned the Judgeship of this Court, and that the appointment has been conferred on J. L. Adolphus, Esq., the eminent reporter of the Queen's Bench Cases. called to the Bar on the 21st June, 1822, and Mr. Adolphus was was one of the Examiners at the Inner Temple. This is a very satisfactory appointment. COMMERCIAL LAW OF ENGLAND AND in London, with a view to the assimilation and and from several Law Societies. We shall have a statement on the subject to lay before our readers next week. Superior Courts: Lord Chancellor.-Lords Justices. RECENT DECISIONS IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS, Lord Chancellor. 483 and documents, so far as to give validity to any contract or agreement by way of pledge, lien, Navulshaw v. Brownrigg and others. July 22, or security, bona fide made by any person with PRINCIPAL 24, 1852. AND FACTOR. RIGHT ΤΟ for such agent so intrusted as aforesaid, as well any original loan, advance, or payment made upon the security of such goods and doadvance in respect thereof; and such contract cuments, as also for any further or continuing or agreement shall be binding upon and good against the owner of such goods, and all other Certain goods were consigned by the plaintiff in India, to the defendants at Liverpool, for sale, and they accepted bills against the goods drawn by him. The defendants informed C. & Co., their London correspond-persons interested therein, notwithstanding the ents, that they expected the goods on sale, and person claiming such pledge or lien may have on their arrival they were forwarded to C. to contract or agreement is made, is only an had notice that the person with whom such be sold, and the defendants drew bills on C., agent." who accepted the same. Upon the defendThe Lord Chancellor said, that the general ants becoming insolvent, and the plaintiff's authority which the defendants had to sell the bills being dishonoured, he filed a bill for goods must be construed to imply an authority an account and payment of the proceeds of to pledge them, unless they were expressly prothe goods, charging fraud: Held, dismiss-hibited, so as to bring the case within the proing with costs, an appeal from Vice-Chan- viso of sect. 3, exempting such cases from the cellor Lord Cranworth dismissing the bill, operation of the act; and that as there was no that the defendants were entitled, under the such prohibition, and there was no mala fides 5 & 6 Vict. c. 39, s. 1. to pledge the goods, made out by the plaintiff, the decision of the as the authority to sell implied a right to Court below would be affirmed with costs. pledge the goods. THIS was an appeal from the decision of Vice-Chancellor Lord Cranworth (reported 1 Sim. N. S. 573). It appeared that the plaintiff, who was a merchant in India, consigned in March, 1847, to the defendants at Liverpool, two boxes of pearls, for sale on his account, and he drew against the goods to the amount of 2,4661. on the defendants. The defendants sent the pearls to their London correspondents, Messrs. Collet & Co., who had also been informed that the pearls were expected to be received from India for sale, with instructions to sell the same, and they drew on Messrs. Collet for 2,000l., on the security of the pearls, which, upon falling due, was renewed by Messrs. Collet for 1,680l. pearls to the amount of 3201. having been sold. The defendants in November became insolvent, and the bills drawn by the plaintiff were not honoured, and Messrs. Collet paid the bill for 1,680l. accepted by them. The pearls were sold for 1,300l., which Messrs. Collet applied on account of their acceptance. The plaintiff then filed this bill, seeking an account and payment of the proceeds of the pearls, charging fraud. The Vice-Chancellor having dismissed the bill with costs, this appeal was presented. Bethell and Lewis, in support, cited Lickborrow v. Mason, 1 H. Bl. 362; Martisi v. Coles, 1 M. & S. 140; Evans v Truman, 2 B. & Ad. 886; Blain v. Agar, 1 Sim. 37; Colt v. Woollaston, 2 P. Wms. 154. Roll and Goldsmid for the defendants, contrà, referred to sect. 1, of the 5 & 6 Vict. c. 39, which enacts, that " any agent who shall hereafter be intrusted with the possession of goods or of the documents of title to goods, shall be deemed and taken to be owner of such goods Lords Justices. In re Direct Exeter, Plymouth, and Devonport WINDING-UP ACT.-MANAGING COMMITTEE. An order to wind up a company had been ob- THIS was an appeal from Vice-Chancellor Parker (reported 5 De G. & S., p. 117), dismissing with costs a petition to discharge an order to wind up the above company. It was also sought to discharge the order for a call made by Master Horne to meet the costs of winding-up. It appeared that, in consequence of the recent decisions, the number of contributories were reduced to the seven members of the managing committee, three of whom, Mr. Woolmer, Mr. Kingdon, and Mr. Bastard, sought to discharge the order, obtained by Lieut. Col. Ellis in June, 1849, to wind up the company, on the ground it had been obtained without their concurrence. The Master had made a call on each for a seventh of the gross amount of the expenses, giving credit for the sums they had respectively contributed. Bacon and Terrell in support of the appeal; Sir W. Page Wood and Roxburgh for the official manager; Malins and Daniel for Lieut. Col. Ellis, contrà. The Lords Justices said, the winding-up order was obtained, and the proceedings thereunder prosecuted, with the sanction and concurrence of the petitioners, and they could not therefore now object to the proceedings because they had gained nothing. The appeal would accordingly be dismissed with costs. And as it appeared the mode in which the Master had made the call was reasonable and proper, the motion to discharge the same would also have to be refused with costs. Vice-Chancellor Parker. Calder v. Calder. June 11, 1852. DEVISE TO TRUSTEES WITH POWER OF SALE.-CONFIRMATION OF CONTRACT OF SALE WHERE SUIT PENDING. A petition was refused for the confirmation of a contract of sale of certain property by trustees under a will, with power to sell, and lease, and to give receipts, where a suit had been instituted for the administration of the testator's estate, and a reference was directed as to whether it was fit and proper to sell, and whether the contract was bene ficial for the interests of the cestuis que trusts, some of whom were infants. THIS was a petition, on behalf of the trustees of lands devised by the testator in this cause in trust for his children, with powers of sale and of leasing and to give receipts, praying the confirmation of a contract they had entered into for the sale of a portion thereof. The Master had reported, on a reference in the administration suit that there were no debts outstanding. It appeared some of the children were infants. Shapter in support; Waller, for an infant, consented. The Vice-Chancellor refused the petition, and directed a reference as to whether it was fit and proper to sell any portion of the estate, and also whether the proposed contract was beneficial for the interests of the infants. Court of Queen's Bench. Bostock v. North Staffordshire Railway Company. June 11, 12, 1852. TRIAL, COSTS OF FIRST, WHERE JURY DISCHARGED WITH DEFENDANT'S CONSENT. Held, making absolute a rule for the reviewal of the taxation of costs, that a plaintiff who has obtained a verdict on the second trial of an action, is not entitled to the costs of the first trial, where the jury have been discharged, although they were discharged with the defendants' consent. Welsby showed cause against the rule which had been obtained in this case for the reviewal by the Master of his taxation of the costs. It appeared that upon the first trial the jury had been discharged by the consent of counsel upon their being unable to agree to a verdict, and that upon the second trial the plaintiff obtained a verdict. The Master having allowed the plaintiff his costs of the first trial, this rule had been obtained. The Court (without calling on Honyman in support) said, the fact of the defendants having consented to the jury being discharged did not render the case different from one where it was discharged by the Judge himself, and the rule was accordingly made absolute. Court of Exchequer. Fuller v. Earle. June 5, 1852. ORDER TO ATTACH SHARES ON BEHALF OF JUDGMENT CREDITORS. JURISDICTION TO MAKE OR VARY. Held, that the Court has no jurisdiction to vary an order made under the 1 & 2 Vict. c. 110, s. 14, by a Judge at Chambers, to attach shares belonging to the defendant on the part of judgment creditors, and an application for that purpose by a mortgagee of such shares was therefore refused. CERTAIN shares in the Professional Life Assurance Company belonging to the defendant had been attached under the 1 & 2 Vict. c. 110, s. 14,' upon the application of three judgment creditors to Martin, B., at Chambers, and a motion was now made on behalf of a mortgagee of such shares to discharge the order. Keane in support; Bovill and M. Smith for the judgment creditors. The Court said, that it had no jurisdiction in the matter, as the act only empowered a Judge to make or vary the orders. Which enacts, that "if any person against whom any judgment shall have been entered up in any of her Majesty's Superior Courts at Westminster shall have any Government stock, funds, or annuities, or any stock or shares of or in any public company in England (whether incorporated or not), standing in his name in his own right, or in the name of any person in trust for him, it shall be lawful for a Judge of one of the Superior Courts, on the application of any judgment creditor, to order that such stock, funds, annuities, or shares, or such of them or such part thereof respectively as he shall think fit, shall stand charged with the payment of the amount for which judgment shall have been so recovered, and interest thereon, and such order shall entitle the judgment creditor to all such remedies as he would have been entitled to if such charge had been made in his favour by the judgment debtor; provided that no proceedings shall be taken to have the benefit of such charge until after the expiration of six calendar months from the date of such order." |